trial of john jasper for the murder of edwin drood; in aid

Class.

Book.

Ui aAstejfru,tU4<Q-

TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER FOR THEMURDER OF EDWIN DROOD

KJ AC^wl- 'iiexA-Ky.'. r^X^Jp \ JrvOLA- A^LhAlA^Pu

Trialof

JOHN JASPERFOR THE

MURDEROF

EDWIN DROODin aid of

SAMARITAN,CHILDREN'S HOMEOPATHIC,ST. AGNES and MT. SINAI

HOSPITALS

April 29, 1914

Academy of Music,philadelphia, u. s. a.

PUBLISHED BY THE

Philadelphia Branch Dickens FellowshipJohn M. Patterson, President and Editor

H 1 4 ?

JOs-

o

ffitmiJrh SEfcition

F which Five Hundred numbered and

registered copies have been printed

President and Editor

\ ':''

©ffirrrs vt tl?r plnlaiirlplria Iranrl) ItrkrttB iFrUiuual?t;t. 1914

3. Thomas K. oberVice Presidt ///

5. .1. K. ThompsonS,, retary

2. John C EckelExecutive Council \. Percival S. Woodin

/ i< e-Piesident1. JOHN M. PATTERSON

President 6 W. I. RutterTreasure)

WtCuvrs nf tlir pI1ila^^^tltta $ranrii Sirkrua 3ffrUimislii|i. 1914

3. Sarah A. Evans/ 7i e-Pres ident

5. John Thomson/ i , , /(//. v < ount il (Ex.i. !/".)

2. John G. Scorer.

/ , ., , -I. Curtis Wagrer-Sinithttcil

1. Charles Sessler

Chairman Executive Council 6. John P. Coughlm•/{in il

®abb of (RimtmtB

PAGE

List of Patronesses 12

Program Committee 13

Dramatis Persona? 14

Biography of Participants 15

Introduction 27

Convening Court and Drawing Jury 40

Opening Address for Prosecution 54

Prosecution's Testimony 61 to 93

Testimony of Canon Crisparkle 63

Cross-Examination of Canon Crisparkle 67

Testimony of Neville Landless 71

Cross-Examination of Neville Landless 73

Testimony of Rosa Bud 74

Cross-Examination of Rosa Bud 79

Testimony of Durdles 80

Cross-Examination of Durdles 84

Testimony of Princess Puffer 86

Cross-Examination of Princess Puffer 89

Testimony of Grewgious 91

End of Prosecution's Testimony 93

Opening Address for Defense 93

Defendant's Testimony 95 to 118

Testimony of Mrs. Tope 95

Cross-Examination of Mrs. Tope 97

Testimony of Helena Landless 98

Cross-Examination of Helena Landless 100

Testimony of Mayor Sapsea 101

Cross-Examination of Mayor Sapsea 105

Testimony of John Jasper 107

Cross-Examination of John Jasper 112

End of Testimony for Defense 118

Closing Address of Counsel for Defense 119

Summing up of Prosecution 126

Charge of Court 138

Verdict and Poll of Jury 150

ICtsi nf 311uatrati0ns

PAGEFrontispiece, Charles Dickens

Officers of Philadelphia Branch Dickens Fellowship 7 ^

Letter from Historical Society 27^

Academy of Music 32 ^

Some of the Veniremen 42 v/

John C. Bell 54 ^

John R. K. Scott, Wilmer Krusen, John M. Patterson 67 v

Miss de Mercier and Mrs. Lippincott 86 v

Miss Evans 95 v

Joseph P. Rogers 101 v

Trial Scene 106 «/

John P. Coughlin 112 </

William L. Tilden and A. G. Hetherington 119 •

Judge Elkin 138 ^

The Wheeler Brothers 150 v

Mnttm &xmt

John P. Elkin, October 3, 1915

Sarah A. Evans, December 29, 1915

George W. Kendrick, February 26, 1916

James W. King, February 24, 1915

J. Parker Norris, March 17, 1916

John Thomson, February 23, 1916

William T. Tilden, July 29, 1915

J. William White, April 24, 1916

Jlatnmefififa

Mrs. J. Parker Norris, Jr., Chairman

Audenreid, Mrs. Charles Y.

Barratt, Mrs. Norris S.

Bell, Mrs. John C.

Blankenburg, Mrs. Rudolph

Brown, Mrs. William Findlay

Bullock, Mrs. J. Maxwell

Burpee, Mrs. G. H.

Carson, Mrs. Hampton L.

Cochrane, Mrs. Travis

Coughlin, Mrs. John P.

Crawford, Mrs. Andrew W.Dixon, Mrs. George Dallas

Donoghue, Mrs. Daniel C.

Douglas, Mrs. Walter deC.

Earle, Mrs. George H., Jr.

Eckel, Mrs. John C.

Elkin, Mrs. John P.

Ellison, Mrs. Wm. R.

Foster, Mrs. Thomas C.

Fraley, Mrs. Frederick

Geiger, Mrs. Mary S.

George, Mrs. William H.

Gummey, Mrs. Charles F.

Haggarty, Mrs. Cornelius

Hanson, Mrs. M. F.

Hetherington, Mrs. A. G.

Kane, Mrs. John KentKendrick, Mrs. MurdockKnowles, Mrs. Wm. GrayKrusen, Mrs. WilmerLewis, Mrs. John F.

Zackey,

Lit, Mrs. Samuel D.

Lovett, Mrs. HenryMartin, Mrs. J. Willis

McMichael, Mrs. Charles B.

Murphy, Mrs. Thos. E.

Ober, Mrs. Thomas K.

Patterson, Mrs. John M.Peddie, Mrs. Mary H.

Pedrick, Mrs. Washington F.

Pusey, Mrs. Frederick T.

Ridgway, Mrs. ThomasRogers, Mrs. Joseph P.

Schoff, Mrs. Frederick

Scorer, Mrs. John G.

Scott, Mrs. John R. K.

Selig, Mrs. S.

Sessler, Mrs. Charles

Sipler, Miss Martha H.

Smith, Mrs. FrankSmith, Miss A. WalkerSullivan, Mrs. Jas. F.

Tener, Mrs. John K.

Thompson, Mrs. J. K.

Tower, Mrs. CharlemagneVare, Mrs. Edwin H.

Voorhees, Mrs. Theodore

Wager-Smith, Miss Curtis

Wentz, Mrs. Caroline HanceWhelen, Mrs. Wm. B.

Woodin, Mrs. Percival S.

Wurtz, Mrs. Chas. Stewart

Miss Helen M.

Jn (EJjarge of Programs

Mrs. John C.

Miss Esther BachMiss Catharine BradyMiss Violet ChadwickMiss Edna Diernbach

Mrs. Charles DrakeMiss Jane EwingMrs. H. J. Fraley

Mrs. Arthur Goldsmith

Eckel, Chairman

Miss Mae Loftus

Miss Margaret LukesMiss Gertrude LukesMiss Clare Mulholland

Miss Ardis TanguayMiss Eleanor WoodwardMiss Louise Woodward

3lj? ©rial Qlourt

The JudgeSupreme Court Justice John P. Elkin

For the Prosecution

John C. BellAttorney General of Pennsylvania

John M. Patterson

Judge of Common Pleas No. 1

For the Defence

John R. K. Scott

Congressman at Large from Pennsylvania

Percival S. Woodin

Court Officer Ralph BinghamCourt Clerk Henry F. WaltonCourt Cryer Levi Hart

j' Arthur L. WheelerTipstaves j Walter S. WheelerCourt Stenographer Ernest N. Ross

Stage Director John G. EckelAssistant Stage Director Charles Sessler

Stage Manager Frank M. Rainger

(Utjararta-0 in tJje l&aak

John Jasper John P. Coughlin

Canon Crisparkle Dr. Wilmer Krusen

Durdles John G. Scorer

Sapsea Joseph P. Rogers

Grewgious John Kent KaneNeville Landless Paxon T. Deeter

Rosa Bud Winifred De Mercier-Panton

Helena Landless Mrs. J. Howard Reber

Mrs. Tope Miss Sarah A. Evans

Princess Puffer Miriam Lee Earley Lippincott

SuigrapJjg of JJarttnpanta

In accordance with well recognized rules of gallantry,the editor has refrained from giving the ages of the ladieswho took part in the trial. Suffice it to say that theywere all young, charming and clever.

Miss Evans was a public educator in Philadelphia.

Miss De Mercier-Panton is serving as a Red Cross nursewith the Allies during the present war.

Mrs. A. Haines Lippincott is the wife of a well-knownphysician.

Mrs. J. Howard Reber is the wife of a prominent Phila-delphia lawyer.

Baldi, C. C. A.

Born in Italy, December 2, 1862. Chevalier of the Crownof Italy. Banker, publisher and merchant.

Bell, John Cromwell, A.M., LL.B., LL.D.

Born at Elders Ridge, Pa., October 3, 1861. Graduatedwith honors, Law School, University of Pennsylvania,1884; District Attorney of Philadelphia, 1903-1907; At-torney General of Pennsylvania, 1911-1915. Author:"Several Modes of Instituting Criminal Proceedings,""Public Service Law of Pennsylvania," etc. Has degree ofLL.D. from Temple University, and is Trustee of the Uni-versity of Pennsylvania.

Bingham, Ralph.Born at Richmond, Va., August 2, 1870. Educated pub-

lic schools and private tutelage; (honorary A.B., Villa-nova College, Pennsylvania, 1906). Humorist. Founderand ex-President International Lyceum Association ofAmerica. Author several short plays, contributor humor-ous articles to magazines and newspapers.

Blankenburg, Rudolph.Born in Barntrup, Lippe Detmold, Germany, February

16, 1843. Manufacturer and importer. LL.D., Lafayette,Ursinus and Dartmouth. Author of many articles in mag-azines. Mayor of Philadelphia, 1912-1915.

15

BIOGRAPHY OF PARTICIPANTS

Brown, William Findlay.

Born in Philadelphia, July 23, 1861. Graduate of Lafa-yette College, 1880; Ph.B., Harvard M. S. Admitted to

the Bar in 1892; First Assistant District Attorney ofPhiladelphia, 1908. Compiler of Brown's Digest of Lawsand Ordinances of Philadelphia.

Brumbaugh, Martin Grove.

Born in Huntingdon County, Pa., April 14, 1862. B.E.,

Juniata College; M.E., B.S., M.A., Ph.D., University ofPennsylvania; LL.D., Mt. Morris, Franklin and Marshall,University of Pennsylvania; Litt.D., Lafayette; Superin-tendent of Public Schools, Huntingdon County, 1884-90;Professor Pedagoerv, University of Pennsylvania, 1895-1900,1902-06; First Cornr. Ed., Porto Rico, 1900-02; Superinten-dent Public Schools, Philadelphia County, 1906-15. ElectedGovernor of Pennsylvania, November 3, 1914. Author

:

History of Brethren, Standard Readers, Life and Works ofChristopher Dock, etc.

Budd, Henry.Born in Philadelphia, November 12, 1849. A.B., A.M.,

University of Pennsylvania. Lawyer. Author of St.

Mary's Hall Lectures; Leading Cases in American Law ofReal Property; Index Digest Weekly Notes of Cases.

Carr, William A.

Born in Farmington, la., September 28, 1869. Graduateof Law Department, University of Pennsylvania. Admittedto the Bar, 1894. Twice candidate for Congress, SixthPennsylvania District. In general practice of law.

Carstairs, J. H.Born in Philadelphia, August 7, 1863. Actively engaged

in various lines of business.

Chandler, Frederick T.

Born Hanoverton, Chester County, December 5> 1863.Educated in the public schools. Banker and broker;President of the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, 1906-07.

Coughlin, John P.

Born in Philadelphia, February 1, 1870. Graduatedfrom La Salle College, Philadelphia. Admitted to the Barin 1897.

Da Costa, J. Chalmers.Born in Washington, D. C, November 15, 1863. M. D.,

LL.D., Samuel D. Gross Professor of Surgery in the Jef-ferson Medical College; Attending Surgeon to the JeffersonMedical College Hospital; Consulting Surgeon to St.

Joseph's Hospital. Author of "Manual of Modern Sur-gery"; Editor of "American Edition of Gray's Anatomy."

16


Daly, Thomas A.

Born in Philadelphia, May 28, 1871. A.M., FordhamUniversity, 1901; Litt.D., Fordham University, 1910. Poet-humorist, "Evening Ledger." Author: "Canzoni," "Car-mina," "Madrigali," "Little Polly's Pomes," "Songs of

Wedlock."

Deeter, Paxson.Born in Reading, Pa., December 23, 1880. B.S., 1903, and

LL.B., 1906, University of Pennsylvania. Member of thePhiladelphia Bar

Eckel, John C. &$Born in New York, August 18, 18S6, but spent his early

days in Illinois, where he taught school and was admitted to

the bar. Entered the newspaper business in 1885. Has beencity editor and managing editor of several Chicago dailies.

Also held executive positions on W. R. Hearst's publica-

tions in New York. Joined the "North American" staff

in January, 1901, on which paper he has been night editor

since 1904. Under authority from the London parentbody he became the founder of the Philadelphia Branchof the Dickens's Fellowship in 1906. He was its first presi-

dent. In 1913 he published a Bibliography of Dickens'sFirst Editions.

Elkins, George W.Born in Philadelphia, September 26, 1858. Educated in

public and private schools. Officer and Director of manycorporations. Also identified with numerous charitable

institutions.

Elkin, John P.

Born in West Mahoney Township, Indiana County,Pennsylvania, January 11, 1860. Early education received

in the public schools of the country. Graduated fromIndiana Normal School, became a teacher, entered LawDepartment of the University of Michigan in 1882, grad-uated 1884. Admitted to the Bar in 1885. One year before

his admission he was elected to the Legislature, and in 1886was returned by an increased majority. In 1895 he wasappointed Deputy Attorney-General, and four years later

Governor Stone appointed him Attorney-General. In 1904he was nominated as one of the Justices of the SupremeCourt of Pennsylvania.

Ellison, William Rodman.Born in Philadelphia, April 11, 1856. Educated at the

Protestant Episcopal Academy of Philadelphia, and at

Geneva, Switzerland. Merchant

17


Folwell, Nathan T.

Born in Philadelphia, March 21, 1847. Manufacturerand dealer in textiles. President of the Manufacturers'Club. Author of pamphlet on "Protection of AmericanIndustries."

Gest, John Marshall.Born at Philadelphia, March 17, 1859. A.B., 1879; A.M.

and LL.B., 1882, University of Pennsylvania. Admittedto the Philadelphia Bar, April 1, 1882. Judge of the Or-phans' Court since 1911. In 1909 published "PracticalSuggestions for Drawing Wills, &c, in Pennsylvania."In 1913 "The Lawyer in Literature" and numerous papersin legal magazines.

Gribbel, John.Born in Hoboken, N. J., March 29, 1858. A.M., Wesleyan

University. Publisher; Officer and Director in various cor-

porations. Elected President of the Union League in 1914.

Hanson, M. F.

Born in Philadelphia, February 16, 1867. Connected withthe "Philadelphia Record" for twenty-six years.

Harrison, Charles Custis.

Born in Philadelphia, May 3, 1844. Educated at theAcademy of the Protestant Episcopal Church, Philadel-

phia; A.B., 1862, and A.M., 1865, University of Pennsyl-vania; LL.D,, Columbia University, 1895; Princeton, 1896;Yale, 1901; University of Pennsylvania, 1911. Provost of

the University of Pennsylvania, 1894-1911. President ofthe Municipal Art Jury of Philadelphia. Publisher ofProvost's Reports, 1895-1908.

Hart, Levi.

Born February 5, 1851, at Chestnut Hill, Philadelphia.Educated in the public schools, and Bryant and Stratton's

College. Member of the Twenty-first Sectional SchoolBoard for twenty-three years. Member of Common Council.

Cryer of the Court of Oyer and Terminer and QuarterSessions of the Peace of Philadelphia County for twenty-five years. Compiled forms used in the Court of Oyer andTerminer in the trial of Murder Cases.

Hetherington, Albert Gallatin.

Born in Clarion, Pa., April 11, 1852. A graduate ofBucknell University. Has taken an active interest in

artistic and literary life in Philadelphia. Director Educa-tion and Art to Pennsylvania Panama Commission.

18


Huneker, John F.

Born at Philadelphia, October 29, 1851. Educated Roth's

Academy, Philadelphia. Shipped to sea in his early 20's,

and saw considerable of the world, and later called to takeup his father's business and subsequently became Presi-

dent of the Chapman Decorative Company. Always tookinterest in sport and became active in the Schuylkill Navyin both rowing and official work, representing the MaltaBoat Club, on the Schuylkill Navy Board for many years,

and was Vice-Commodore, 1881-82, also represented Phila-

delphia on the national Executive Committee of AmateurRowing. Was one of the founders of the Athletic Clubof the Schuylkill Navy, in 1884, and Captain of that Clubfor several years, during part of its successful athletic

career. Contributed several times to papers and maga-zines on amateur sport.

Jastrow, Morris, Jr.

Born in Warsaw, Poland, August 13, 1861. Educatedat private schools, 1877, and the University of Pennsyl-vania. B.A., 1881, University of Pennsylvania; Ph.D., 1884,University of Leipzig; LL.D., 1914, University of Pennsyl-vania. Professor of Semitic Languages and Librarian at

the University of Pennsylvania. Publisher of "Religionof Babylonia and Assyria"; "Study of Religion"; ReligionBabyloniens und Assyriens (German) ; Aspects of Reli-

gious Belief and Practice in Babylonia and Assyria; He-brew and Babylonian Traditions; Babylonian and AssyrianBirth-omens and their Cultural Significance; Civilization

of Babylonia and Assyria.

Johnson, Alba B.

Born in Pittsburgh, Pa., February 8, 1858. Educated at

the public schools and Central High. LL.D., Ursinus Col-

lege. Director of many corporations and President of the

Baldwin Locomotive Works.

Kane, John Kent.Born in Wilmington, Del., September 3, 1873. Graduated

from Harvard in 1893; University of Pennsylvania(Law), 1897. Admitted to the Bar in 1897.

Kavanagh, Rt. Rev. Monsgr. Charles F.

Born in Philadelphia, 1867, educated in Public Schools

and in La Salle College, Philadelphia. Entered St. Charles'

Seminary, Overbrook, September 2, 1887, ordained to the

Priesthood June 12, 1897. Catholic University, Washington,1897-1898. Assistant Priest, St. Vincent's, Minersville;

Holy Family, Manyunk; St. Francis Xavier, Philadelphia

and the Cathedral; Secretary of Diocese of Philadelphia,

1906-1911; Chancellor, 1911-1914. Rector of St. Stephen's,

Port Carbon and St. Katharine's, Wayne, Pa. Master of

19


Arts, La Salle College; Bachelor of Theology, CatholicUniversity, Washington. Made Domestic Prelate, with theTitle of Monsignor by His Holiness, Pope Pius X on the3d day of February, 1912.

Kendrick, George W., Jr.Born Philadelphia, July 31, 1841. Educated in public

schools; graduated from Central High School, 1858; mem-ber of Board of City Trusts; banker and director of manycorporations.

King, James W.Born in Philadelphia, October 5, 1858; died February 24,

1915; educated in Philadelphia, graduating from HighSchool. City Editor and Managing Editor of "The Press"for a number of years. Admitted to Philadelphia Bar; ap-pointed by Governor Tener a member of the PennsylvaniaPanama-Pacific Commission and acted as its Counsel;member of the Executive Committee of Archbishop Ryan'sSilver Jubilee; received an honorary degree from Lafay-ette College.

Krusen, Wilmer.Born in Bucks County, May 18, 1869. M.D., Jefferson

Medical College, 1893; Instructor at Jefferson MedicalCollege 1894; Vice-President and Professor of Gynecologyat Temple University; Director of Health and Charities ofthe City of Philadelphia; Fellow of the College of Phy-sicians of Philadelphia; Fellow of American College ofSurgeons.

Lewis, Francis A..born in Philadelphia, October 1, 1857. B.A., LL.B., M.A.,

University of Pennsylvania. Attorney-at-Law retired.Director of many corporations. Editor Smith's LeadingCases, Law of the Stock Exchange; author of many pam-phlets, chiefly on Ecclesiastical Subjects.

Long, John Luther.Born in Philadelphia, 1861. Admitted to Philadelphia

Bar. Author of Madame Butterfly (1898), The FoxWoman (1900), The Prince of Illusion (1901), NaughtyNan, The Dragon Fly (1905), Billy Boy, The Way of theGods (1906), and, in collaboration with David Belasco, TheDarling of the Gods (1902).

Lovett, Henry.Born in Langhorne, Pa., December 5, 1865. M.D., Jeffer-

son Medical College, 1888. President of Peoples NationalBank, and of the Langhorne Spring Water Company.

McFadden, John H.Born in Philadelphia, Dec. 3, 1850. Educated in the

Episcopal Academy. Graduated in 1868. Well known inart, scientific and commercial circles throughout the world.

20


McMaster, John Bach.Born in Brooklyn, N. Y., June 29, 1852. Graduate Col-

lege of the City of New York, 1870. Litt.D., University ofPennsylvania, 1894; LL.D, Washington and JeffersonCollege, 1901 ; LL.D., University of Toronto, 1907. Author1883-1913, A History of the People of the United States,

8 vols.; 1887, Benjamin Franklin as a Man of Let-ters; 1902, Daniel Webster; 1896, With Its Fathers;Sketches in American History; Origin, Meaning and Ap-plication of the Monroe Doctrine; 1897, School History ofthe United States; 1901, A Primary History of the UnitedStates; 1903, Chapters IX, XI and XII, in Vol. 7, Cam-bridge Modern History; 1903, Social, Industrial and Politi-

cal Rights of Man in America.

Miller, Charles R.

Born in Chester County, Pennsylvania, September 30,1857. B.L. Swarthmore College, 1879, LL.B. Universityof Pennsylvania, 1881. Admitted to the Philadelphia Bar,1881. Governor of Delaware, term 1913-17.

Miller, Leslie W.Born in Battleboro, Vt., August 5, 1848. Educated at the

Massachusetts Normal Art School and Boston Museum ofFine Arts. Principal since 1880 of the PennsylvaniaMuseum and School of Industrial Art. Lecturer on Art atSwarthmore College. Author of "Essentials of Perspective"and many lectures and addresses on Art and Education.

Murphy, Thomas Edward.Born in Louisville, N. Y., July 18, 1859. Educated in the

public schools of Portland, Maine; attended the Union LawSchool of Chicago; completed his legal education with Mr.W. Horace Rose, of Johnstown, Pa. Admitted to the Barin Johnstown, Pa. Appointed by Governor Tener Aide-de-Camp, iStaff Commander-in-Chief, January, 1911, with therank of Lieutenant Colonel; re-appointed by GovernorBrumbaugh in January, 1915.

Norris, J. Parker.

Born in Philadelphia, November 3, 1847. Educated in

private schools in this city and graduated from Universityof Pennsylvania with the degree of A.B. Admitted to thePhiladelphia Bar, March, 1870. Shakespearean authorityand author cf several books on Shakespeare. Has a largecollection of Shakespeareana which is the result of yearsof research work.

Ober, Thomas Kerr.

Born at West Troy, N. Y., January 17, 1837. Educatedin public and private schools. Business man.

21


Qberholtzer, Ellis Paxson.Born in Chester County, Pa., in 1868. A.B., Ph.D., Uni-

versity of Pennsylvania. Editor, historian, Master ofPageants. Author of "The Referendum in America";"Robert Morris, Patriot and Financier" ; Abraham Lincoln

;

Henry Clay; The Literary History of Philadelphia; JayCooke, Financier of the Civil War (2 vols.) ; Philadelphia,

a history of the City and Its People (4 vols.). Editor"American Crisis Biographies" (20 vols.).

Patterson, John M.Born in Philadelphia, March 4, 1874. Educated in the

public schools; graduated from Law Department, Uni-versity of Pennsylvania, 1896. Author of "Lawyers of

Dickens' Land"; "Dickens and Christmas," and several

legal essays published in the American Law Register; the

Green Bag and Chicago Law Journal. Trustee of TempleUniversity, Garretson Hospital, Samaritan Hospital; Direc-

tor of Maternity Hospital. Served with the First Penn-sylvania Volunteers during the Spanish-American Warfrom May 11, 1898, to October 15, 1898. AppointedAssistant City Solicitor April, 1902; Assistant District

Attorney November, 1904; elected to the Common Pleasbench of Philadelphia County in 1913.

Pennypacker, Samuel W.Born in Phoenixville, Pa., April 9, 1843. LL.B., Univer-

sity of Pennsylvania; LL.D., University of Pennsylvania,Franklin and Marshall College, Mulhenberg College.

Veteran of the Civil War; member of the Board of

Public Education; President of the Law Academy;Judge Common Pleas Court of Philadelphia County, 1889;President Judge, 1896; Governor of the State of Pennsyl-vania, 1903; Trustee of the University of Pennsylvania;President of many societies. Author Digest of the EnglishCommon Law Reports, Pennsylvania Colonial Cases, 4 vols,

of Pennypacker's Supreme Court Reports, 45 vols., WeeklyNotes of Cases; Annals of Phoenixville; Historical andBiographical Sketches; Settlement of Germantown; Penn-sylvania in American History, etc.

Pepper, George Wharton.Born in Philadelphia, March 16, 1867. A.B., University

of Pennsylvania, 1887; LL.B., 1889; admitted to the Bar,1889; LL.D., University of Pennsylvania, 1907; D.C.L.,University of the South, 1908; LL.D., Yale, 1914; AlgernonSydney Biddle Professor of Law, University of Pennsyl-vania, 1893-1910; Trustee of University of Pennsylvania;Lyman Beecher Lecturer for 1915 in Yale University;Trustee of the Carnegie Institution. Author of the Border-land of Federal and State Decisions, 1889; Pleading atCommon Law and Under the Codes, 1891 ; Digest of theLaws of Pennsylvania, 1700-1901; Digest of Decisions and

22


Encyclopaedia of Pennsylvania Law, 1754-1898; TheWay, 1909; A Voice From the Crowd, 1915.

Rogers, Joseph P.

Born in Tamaqua, Pa., March 17, 1876. Admitted tothe Philadelphia Bar in 1899; appointed Assistant CitySolicitor in 1901; Assistant District Attorney, 1911; electedto the Common Pleas Bench of Philadelphia County, 1915.

Rosenbach, A. S. W.Born in Philadelphia, July 22, 1876; B.S., University of

Pennsylvania, 1898; Ph.D., 1901; Secretary of The Rosen-bach Company; Collaborator with Austin Dobson of Dr.Johnson's Prologue Spoken at the Opening of the Theatrein Drury Lane, in 1898; compiler of the Catalogues ofthe Works of Robert Louis Stevenson in the collection ofthe late H. E. Widener, 1913, etc., etc.

Ross, Ernest N.Born in Prescott, Arizona, October 26, 1878. Educated

in the Philadelphia public schools, Drexel Institute, Tem-ple University and under private tutelage. Admitted to

the Philadelphia Bar, 1893. Official Stenographer, CommonPleas Court, Philadelphia County, since 1897. Author oftext-book, "Scenario Writing."

Rotan, Samuel P.Born in Philadelphia, January 9, 1869. A.B., A.M.,

Central High School; LL.B., University of Pennsylvania.Admitted to the Bar in 1892; District Attorney of Phila-delphia since 1907. Author, in conjunction with JudgePatterson, of "Rights and Duties of Magistrates."

Ryan, James J.

Born in Ireland in 1848; came to the United States in

1869; general contractor, retired in 1910. Philanthropist;member of the Board of Inspectors of Philadelphia CountyPrisons. Knight of Saint Gregory. 1907, and Knight ofthe Grand Cross of Saint Gregory, 1912, conferred by PopePius X.

Scorer, John G.Born in England in 1859. Educated in America; Ph.D.

Educator and Lecturer; newspaper and magazine editor.

Special writer on educational topics. Author of "Scorer'sPrinciples of Oratory."

Scott, John R. KBorn at Bloomsburg, Pa., July 6, 1873. Educated in

the public schools; graduated from the Central HighSchool of Philadelphia in 1893; entered the law school ofthe University of Pennsylvania; admitted to the Bar inDecember, 1895; member of the House of Representativesof Pennsylvania session of 1899; again elected in 1908 and1910; re-elected November, 1912; elected as Congressman-at-Large from Pensylvania in November, 1914.

23


Search, Theodore C.

Born in Southampton, Pa., March 20, 1841. A.M., BrownUniversity, 1885. Manufacturer. President of the Penn-sylvania Museum and School of Industrial Art, Philadel-phia.

Sessler, Charles.Born at Vienna, November 5, 1854. Educated in the

public schools, graduating from the Royal High School;took a practical course in banking. Came to the UnitedStates in 1880, entering the book business at once, estab-

lishing the present rare book center, specializing in first

editions of Dickens, colored plate books, etc. Throughouthis experience, he has been of assistance in the formationof bibliographical works on the subjects in which he spe-

cializes.

Smith, Edgar Fahs.Born York, Pa., May 23, 1856. B.S., Pennsylvania

College, 1874; Ph.D., Goettingen, 1876; Sc.D., Universityof Pennsylvania, 1899; University of Dublin (Ireland),

1912; Yale University, 1914; L.H.D., Muhlenberg College,

1911; Chem.D., University of Pittsburgh, 1915; LL.D., Uni-versity of Wisconsin, 1904; University of Pennsylvania,1906; Pennsylvania College, 1906; Franklin and MarshallCollege, 1910; Rutgers College, 1911; University of Pitts-

burgh, 1912; University of North Carolina, 1912; Prince-

ton, 1913; Wittenberg, 1914; Brown University, 1914;Allegheny College, 1915. Blanchard Professor of Chemis-try and Provost, University of Pennsylvania. Author of

Classen's Quantitative Analysis, Clinical Analysis of Urine(with Dr. J. Marshall), Richter's Inorganic Chemistry,Smith & Keller's Chemical Experimentation, Richter's Or-ganic Chemistry, Electro-Chemical Analysis, Oettel's

Practical Exercises in Electro-Chemistry, Oettel's Electro-Chemical Experiments, Elements of Chemistry, ShorterCourse Chemical Experiments, Theories of Chemistry, Ele-

ments of Electro-Chemistry, Chemistry in America.

Solis-Cohen, Solomon.Born in Philadelphia, September 1, 1857. A.B., Central

High of Philadelphia, 1872; A.M., 1877; M.D., 1883, Jef-

ferson Medical College; Professor Clinical Medicine, Jef-

ferson Medical College, since 1902; Emeritus Professor of

Medicine and Therapeutics, Philadelphia Polyclinic. Authorof "Essentials of Diagnosis"; "Therapeutics of Tuber-culosis." Editor and part author of "A System of Physi-

ologic Therapeutics." Editor or contributing editor of

various medical periodicals. Author of various mono-graphs on medical subjects; contributor to medical andgeneral encyclopedias; contributor of essays and verses to

literary periodicals.

24


Staake, William H.

Born in Brooklyn, N. Y., December 5, 1846. A.B., A.M.,Central High of Philadelphia; L.L.B., University of Penn-sylvania. Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Phila-

delphia County. Author of many papers and addresses.

Stuart, Edwin S.

Born in Philadelphia, December 28, 1853. LL.D., Lafay-ette, University of Pennsylvania and University of Pitts-

burgh. Merchant, President of the Board of Directors of

City Trusts; Deputy Governor and member of Board of

Directors of Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. Mayorof the City of Philadelphia, 1891-95 and Governor of the

State of Pennsylvania, 1907-11.

Thomson, John.Born in England, 1830. Educated in London. He came to

Philadelphia in 1881. For eight years private Librarianto Clarence H. Clark, and three years to Jay Gould. Hasbeen Librarian of the Free Library of Philadelphia since

its organization. In 1904 he sought the co-operation ofAndrew Carnegie and obtained a gift of $1,500,000 to beused in erection of thirty branch libraries throughout thecity. Author of "Descriptive Catalogue of the Library of

C. D. Clark"; "Catalogue of the Library of Jay Gould";descriptive catalogue of the works of Sir Walter Scott;

and the Library of Old Authors printed for the freelibrary; and catalogues of the libraries of Thomas Dolanand the Rittenhouse Club; essays on "Black Books," de-

livered before the Antiquarian Society, and a volume en-

titled, "Hither and Thither," being a collection of essayson books, issued in book form in 1906. One of the found-ers of the Philobiblon Club, in 1904, and served continu-ously as its curator.

Tilden, William T.

Born St. George, Delaware, March 9, 1855. A.B. CentralHigh School, Philadelphia, 1872. Merchant. President ofUnion League, 1912, 13, 14. Died July 29, 1915.

Tompkins, Rev. Floyd.

Born New York, February 7, 1850; A.B. Harvard, 1872;P.D. Gen. Theological Seminary, N. Y., 1875 (S.T.D.U. of

Pa., 1901; LL.D. Temple College, 1903; D.D. Universityof the South, 1911) ; Church of Holy Trinity, Philadel-

phia since 1899. Author of many books.

Tower, Charlemagne.Born in Philadelphia, April 17, 1848. Graduated Har-

vard University, 1872; LL.D., 1897, Lafayette; 1903, Uni-versity of Chicago; 1901, University of Glasgow (Scot-

land) ; 1903, University of St. Andrews (Scotland); 1909,

25


Hamilton College. Admitted to the Philadelphia Bar in

1878. Publisher of "The Marquis de La Fayette in the

American Revolution," 1895. "Essays, Political and His-torical," 1914. United States Minister to Austria-Hun-gary, 1897. Ambassador to Russia, 1899. Ambassador to

Germany, 1902-1908.

Walton, Henry F.

Born in Stroudsburg, Pa., October 2, 1858. LL.D., At-torney-at-Law ; Assistant City Solicitor; member of theLegislature, 1891, 1893, 1895, 1903, 1905, 1906; Chairmanof the Republican State Committee, 1909, 1910; Speakerof the House of Representatives, 1895, 1903, 1905, 1906;Prothonotary of the Courts of Common Pleas of Philadel-

phia County.

Wheeler, Arthur L.

Born in Philadelphia, May 11, 1873. Attended St. Paul'sSchool, Concord, N. H. B.S. at Princeton University, 1896.Engaged in the manufacturing business.

Wheeler, Walter S.

Born at Bryn Mawr, July 31, 1875. Educated at Haver-ford School and by private tutors. Banking and manufac-turing; extensive traveler; Fellow Royal GeographicalSociety, etc. Editor of "The Optimist."

White, J. William.Born in Philadelphia, November 2, 1850, M.D., Ph.D. Uni-

versity of Pennsylvania, 1871, LL.D. Aberdeen, 1906. Con-nected with many hospitals and medical colleges, Fellowof College of Physicians of Philadelphia, Honorary Fellow,American College of Surgeons. Publications: AmericanText Book of Surgery, Genito-Urinary Surgery, HumanAnatomy, numerous surgical articles and text books onsurgery and systems of surgery ; Text Book of the War forAmericans.

Woodin, P. S.

Born in Seville, Ohio, August 21, 1873. Educated in thepublic schools of Akron, Ohio; student in Butler Academyand under private tutelage. Certificate to teach, Empor-ium, Kansas, 1889-1890; Philadelphia. 1892, Principal; 1895,Supervisor; student Post-Graduate Department, Universityof Pennsylvania; Ph.D. course, 1894-1897; Temple Uni-versity Law Course, 1905-1908. Admitted to practice,

1909. Successively Principal and Supervisor, MapleGrove. Watson Comly, Olney, and Marshall Public Schools,1892-1912.

26

(Otfu-c nf ilir liilu-an.iu

(L!ic "Bietotiral ^ar«tij of JJcnnoiillinittM

^lnl;ii>rlfilu;t

May 5, 1914.

Hon. John M. Patterson,

Court of Common Pleas,

City Hall, Philadelphia,

Dear Judge Patterson:-

At the suggestion of President Sam-

uel W. Pennypacker, I am writing to request you to send us all

the printed literature relating to the Trial of John Jasper, for

preservation in this Society.

Ycurs v c-ry truly,

L^-^ Librarian,

j3Lx\sia_^-

IntroductionBY JOHN M. PATTERSON

We are told that the people of ancient Thebeswere at one time in great fear of a certain monsterwhich infested the highroad. It had the body of a

lion and the upper part of a woman. It lay crouched

on the top of a rock and arrested all travelers that

came that way, proposing to them a riddle, with the

condition that those who would solve the riddle

should pass safely, but those who failed, should be

killed. This monster was called a Sphinx, and has

ever since been regarded as a fit emblem of mysteryYet, the riddle of the Sphinx was solved by ffidepus.

This so mortified the Sphinx that she cast herself

down from the rock and perished. The mistake that

the Sphinx made was in not asking (Edepus the

right question. Had she, or he, or it, only thought

to inquire about the Mystery of Edwin Drood, the

monster might have been alive to-day and (Edepuswould not have been the cause of such a flood of

dreadful woes as Mr. Sophocles describes. Unfor-tunately for the Sphinx, and, perhaps fortunately

for us, the Mystery of Edwin Drood was unheardof until A.D. 1870. In that year England's great

novelist propounded a riddle which no one has yet

been able to solve.

A great deal has been written about and con-

cerning Dickens's last book. One writer after an-

other has endeavored to fathom the mystery.

Amongst those who have attempted the task, per-

haps the most prominent have been the late Richard

A. Proctor, Mr. J. Cuming Walters and AndrewLang. Each of these had his pet theory. Proctor,

in a small book entitled "Watched by the Dead,"

claimed that Drood was not murdered, but, after

disappearing for a while returned in disguise, and

27

//

TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER

assumed the name of Datchery. J. Cuming Waltershas written several articles on the subject. He con-

tends that Drood was murdered, but his endeavors

to explain the "mystery" have not been very satis-

factory. Andrew Lang has written a very clever

little volume entitled "The Puzzle of Dickens's Last

Plot," in which he argues that Edwin Drood does

not die by the hand of John Jasper, but, after dis-

appearing for a time, returns alive to take up his

occupation as a civil engineer.

Besides these efforts to explain "The Mystery of

Edwin Drood," there have also been written several

so-called sequels to the unfinished story. One of

these is entitled "The Cloven Hoof," by Orpheus C.

Kerr. Another is called "John Jasper's Secret," byHenry Morford, often erroneously attributed to

Charles Dickens's eldest son and Wilkie Collins.

Another is known as "The Mystery of Edwin Drood,

Complete," wherein spiritualism is called upon to

unravel the "mystery." The attempt to have com-munication with the spirit of Charles Dickens, andthus obtain a direct explanation of what the writer

really meant, appears to have been successful. Still

another sequel entitled "A Great Mystery Solved,"

by Gillan Vase (Mrs. Richard Newton), appeared.

So one can see that "The Mystery of Edwin Drood"is a real "mystery" indeed.

For a most comprehensive survey of the Droodcontroversy, as well as a full list of the books on

the subject, see "The Complete Edwin Drood," byJ. Cuming Walters.

Now the history of the "mystery" may be divided

into four parts. First—the writing of the unfin-

ished book by the great novelist, ending in June,

1870. Second—the literary controversy as to

whether Drood was murdered or not, ending in

January, 1914. Third—the trial of John Jasper,

by Justice Gilbert K. Chesterton and a British jury,

28

INTRODUCTION

on the 7th of January, 1914, at the King's Hall,

Covent Garden. Fourth—the subsequent escape of

Jasper to America, and his trial by Justice John P.

Elkin, and a jury of Philadelphia's most prominentcitizens, including a number of well-known profes-

sional and literary men at the Academy of Music,

on the 29th of April, 1914.

Taking these four events in the order named, let

us consider them. First, the writing of the book.

It was a most unfortunate thing that Dickens did

not finish the story, because it gave promise of being

one of his best novels. "I hope his book is finished,"

Longfellow, the poet, wrote when he received the

intelligence of Dickens's death, "it is certainly oneof his most beautiful works, if not the most beauti-

ful of all. It would be sad to think the pen hadfallen from his hand, and left it incomplete."

We all know, or think we know, that Drood wasmurdered by his uncle, Jasper, but the means andthe method of the murder still remain obscure.

There is not one note of death in aught that EdwinDrood does or says, nor is there any direct evidence

that he is really dead, or even that his life wasattempted by Jasper. Everything is circumstantial.

There is no doubt, however, that Dickens intended

to convey the impression that Edwin Drood wasmurdered by Jasper.

As to the books which have been written, the

most that can be said of the best of them is that theyare clever. None of them is convincing, because all

of them are simply speculations and theories. Thevery fact that the case, when tried in London,excited so much interest, indicates that the various

controversial book-writers had been unable to con-

vince many people.

Ordinarily the verdict of a British jury satisfies

the British public. But the verdict of "man-slaughter," which was rendered against John Jas-

29


per, instead of satisfying the public, only left con-

fusion more confounded and added to the uncer-

tainty already existing. Not only did the English

people declare that the verdict meant nothing, but

the entire Dickensian world protested that Jasper

should have been convicted of murder, or else ac-

quitted. He was guilty, or not guilty, and a verdict

in the Pickwickian sense would never do, even if

Bernard Shaw were foreman of the jury whichrendered such a verdict.

It was not with any idea of absolutely settling the

question, one way or another, that the Philadelphia

Branch of the Dickens Fellowship decided to have

John Jasper tried for the murder of Edwin Drood.

In the opinion of the writer the question will never

be satisfactorily settled for many reasons. It mayeven be doubted if Charles Dickens really knew whatthe final outcome of the story was to be. The object

of the trial was simply to present the facts set forth

in the book, and no others, to a jury of twelve intel-

ligent and representative citizens; to have those

facts presented by learned and experienced advo-

cates in the same manner that facts are presented

in a court of justice and subject to the rules of

judicial evidence; and to have those advocates use

their utmost ability in endeavoring to convince the

twelve jurors that the facts either showed, or failed

to show, that John Jasper murdered Edwin Drood.

Surely such a proceeding was as likely to shed light

upon the question as any other method. Of course,

in addition to this, there was also the desire to

entertain the audience, and to widen, if possible, the

interest in the writings of Charles Dickens. It should

also be remembered that the average man or womanhas never seen the trial of a murder case, and it wasintended to give the public a correct representation

of a murder trial. There is always something fas-

cinating about such a case. It is hard to tell to what

30

INTRODUCTION

this interest is due. It may be due to the fact that

crime represents something abnormal—somethingwhich expresses the exact opposite to the almost

exaggerated routine of a well-disciplined existence

—

or perhaps it may be due to those vehement andirregular passions of men which are so unexpectedly

brought to the surface. Perhaps a little of both,

or perhaps it is occasioned by that manifestation

of the element of error and uncertainty which ever

and anon seems to mock, as with the silent laughter

of a Sphinx, the most cautious and deliberate in-

quiry into a few meagre facts which seem to evi-

dence a crime. Nevertheless the interest exhibited

by all sorts and conditions of men and women in

the outcome of a criminal trial is so common, andso keen, that it really helps to make the whole world

kin.

We never tire of reading, again and again, the his-

tory of celebrated trials, whether they be of real

personages or of creatures of the imagination.

No less a personage than Edmond Burke once

said: "I have often wondered that the English

language contains no book like the causes celebres of

the French. Such a collection would exhibit manas he is in action and principle, and not as he is

usually drawn by poets and speculative philos-

ophers."

To-day there are many books which deal with cele-

brated trials both in Europe and America. Most of

us are familiar with accounts of the trials of Sir

Walter Raleigh, of Thomas, Earl of Strafford, of the

poet, Richard Savage, of the Salem Witches, of War-ren Hastings, of Aaron Burr, of Professor Webster,

of Alfred Dreyfus, and a host of others too nu-

merous to mention. These cases not only created a

lively interest at the time, but have been able to

retain a place in the pages of books still worth read-

ing.

31


Then there are those celebrated trials to befound in the great works of fiction. Shakespeare hasgiven us a wonderful trial scene in the Merchant ofVenice. Bulwer and Hood have spun their webs ofromance around the schoolmaster of Lynn, until it is

hard to tell where fiction begins and history ends.

In The Heart of Midlothian, the Wizard of the Northhas made Effie Deans the central figure in a moststirring picture of court room proceedings.

There never was a better stage presentation of acourt proceeding than that which took place at the

American Academy of Music on the evening of

April 29th, 1914. The old Academy had been the

scene of many extraordinary performances in the

past. From July 26th, 1855, when the cornerstone

was laid in the presence of Mayor Robert T. Conrad,and a great gathering of the patrons of the opera,

until the night of the famous Jasper Trial, the stage

of this historic building has echoed the foot-falls of

many of the world's celebrities.

On January 26th, 1857, the formal opening wascelebrated by a magnificent ball, at which the wealth

and fashion of Philadelphia gathered in full force.

The house was opened for its legitimate use by E. A.

Marshall, with Verdi's "II Trovatore," sung by MaxMaretzek's opera troupe, of which the famous Mad-ame Marietta Gazzaniga was the prima donna; the

full cast being as follows: Leonora, Madame Gaz-zaniga; Azucema, Mile. Aldini; Maurico, Sig. Brig-

noli; Count di Luna, Sig. Amodio; Ferando, Sig.

Coletti ; Old Gypsy, Sig. Muttro.

In 1860 a great ball was given at the Academyin honor of the Prince of Wales, later Edward VII.

He was delighted at the architectural splendors of

the building, and said so in unequivocal terms.

Too exhaustive is the list of world renownedsingers who have gained additional laurels on the

stage of this great play-house. Suffice to say that

32

u, oc o

a is

< S

<! a)s-

W 1U

I —

INTRODUCTION

the roster includes Adelina Patti, Mancusi, Morentsi,

Sulzer, Mazzalini, Bellini, Calletti, Medori, Zuchi,

Bosisio, Carnien Poch, Hauk, Parepa Rosa, Annade la Grange, Torriani, Albani, Anna Christine Nils-

son, Campanini, Maurel, Nannetti, Ranconi, Pappen-heim, and the great stars whose names have becomehousehold words within the last three decades.

Grant was nominated for his second term as Pres-

ident of the United States by a Republican Conven-tion held in the Academy in 1872. This was one of

the most important of the many political events held

there.

Occasionally conspicuous dramatic representa-

tions were given by Edwin Forrest, Charlotte Cush-man, and special companies organized for the per-

formance of particular plays.

Booth, Ristori and Salvini also appeared there in

repertoire.

Among the famous instrumentalists who havegiven concerts at the Academy are Ole Bull, Vieux-temps, Rubenstein, Weiniawski, Von Bulow, Sauret,

Moreau, Legendre, Gottschalk, Marie Krebs, Mehlig,

Schiller, Careno, Godard and Paderewski.The Stoddard illustrated travel pictures had their

first presentation in the Academy, and among the

prominent men in the intellectual world who drewimmense audiences were Henry Ward Beecher, Ro-bert G. Ingersoll, T. B. Pugh, John B. Gough and T.

Dewitt Talmage.Dom Pedro, Emperior of Brazil, was frequently at

the Academy during the Centennial.

It will thus be seen that no fitter place on theAmerican continent could have been chosen whereinto try this most celebrated case. With such a cele-

brated trial, and in such an historic court room, it

was necessary that the trial judge should represent

the best traditions of the American judiciary, andthat the jury should consist of men who command

33


the esteem and confidence, not only of the parties,

but of the community, as well. The Judge selected

to preside was Justice John P. Elkin, of the SupremeCourt of Pennsylvania.

The jury, as finally drawn, consisted of:

1. John Bach MacMaster2. George W. Elkins

3. James W. King4. A. G. Hetherington5. William Findlay Brown6. Rudolph Blankenburg7. Edgar Fahs Smith8. George Wharton Pepper9. Samuel W. Pennypacker10. J. Parker Norris11. Charlemagne Tower12. J. William White.

The prosecution had retained as its attorneys,

Attorney-General John C. Bell and Judge John M.Patterson.

The defense was represented by Attorneys JohnR. K. Scott and Percival S. Woodin.Of course the real John Jasper did not appear at

the trial, because he existed only in the fancy of the

"Inimitable Boz."

The melancholy schemer was portrayed by JohnP. Coughlin, a member of the Philadelphia Bar.

Mr. Coughlin as John Jasper was a triumph of

impersonation. He sat in the dock quietly, through-

out most of the trial, watching the witnesses fromunder his dark brows, sometimes covering his face

with his hand, at other moments leaning forward to

keep his intense gaze on Rosa Bud. When he took

the stand his nimble wit in parrying dangerous ques-

tioning during cross examination, won him much34

INTRODUCTION

praise. Under the law, as it existed, at the periodlaid in the book, Jasper could not have testified.

Dr. Wilmer Krusen, a prominent surgeon, essayedthe part of Crisparkle, and gave just the right cler-

ical touch to the honest, kindly, boyish, athletic

canon.

Mayor Sapsea appeared in the person of JosephP. Rogers, who was at that time an assistant dis-

trict attorney, and is now a Common Pleas Judge.He was the pompous auctioneer to the life, thoughfar more keen witted. He seemed to enter into thespirit of the part as thoroughly as any professional

actor. His costume, make-up, mannerisms andrepartee, all combined to draw continued laughterfrom the audience, and a burst of deserved applausewhen he left the witness stand.

The drunken Durdles, as enacted by John G.Scorer, was delicious. He made an excellent witness.

He imitated the popular conception of intoxication

to such perfection that when he left the stand hewas followed by a murmur of approval which is

even more significant of appreciation than the per-

functory handclapping.The angular Mr. Grewgious was cleverly imper-

sonated by John Kent Kane, a member of the Phil-

adelphia Bar.

Neville Landless was excellently acted by PaxsonDeeter, Esq., a member of the Philadelphia Bar.Ralph Bingham played the part of a typical Eng-

lish Bobby. While "not in the book," and, accord-ing to the canons of the critics, not properly in thetrial at all, because they don't have English Bobbiesin Courts, Mr. Bingham made a decided "hit."

The two tipstaves, Athur L. and Walter S.

Wheeler, of giant bulk, were superb in their brilliant

uniforms. In appearance and actions they addedglowingly to the scene.

The women, Rosa Bud, played by Miss Winifred

35


de Mercier; Mrs. Tope, done by Miss Sarah A.Evans ; Helena Landless, by Mrs. J. Howard Reber,and the Princess Puffer, by Mrs. Miriam Lei EarleyLippincott, were all excellent, fitting their roles like

the glove on your hand.Mrs. Lippincott, in particular, gave a dramatic

and horribly realistic portrayal of the opium woman.Her performance was one of the notable points of

the evening.

A word as to the stage and the house. The set-

ting was most impressive. The Academy stage pre-

sented a true and accurate picture of the Englishcourt room. The chairs of the witnesses and jurors,

the counsel table, seats for spectators, and the benchupon which Justice Elkin sat, were exact reproduc-tions of the courts of England during the time of

Dickens. The characters in the trial, from the jus-

tice down to the spectators, were arrayed in cos-

tumes familiar to the lover of the English novelist.

No detail was omitted to take the audience back morethan a half century.

The court room was so arranged that the presid-

ing judge faced an audience, made up of Philadel-

phia's wealth, learning, business activity, culture

and beauty, that filled the Academy from parquet

to amphitheatre.

The trial began at 7.30 o'clock P. M., and lasted

until 12.30 A. M. As an evidence of the intense

interest which the audience had in the outcome of

the trial, it is sufficient to say that few, if any, failed

to remain until the verdict was rendered.

After retiring to deliberate, the jury remainedout for the best part of an hour. It had been agreed

beforehand that a majority vote should decide. Ofcourse, under the law of Pennsylvania, the verdict

of the jury must be unanimous. One of the reasons

for having a majority vote to decide the nature of

the verdict in the Jasper trial was in order that the

36

INTRODUCTION

audience should not be detained for an indefinite

time.

When the jury first retired, the vote was six for

conviction, and six for acquittal. It subsequently

changed to nine for acquittal and three for convic-

tion. When the jury was finally poled, after return-

ing to the court room, the vote stood eleven for

acquittal and one for conviction. The defense hadrelied mainly on the failure of the prosecution to

prove that anybody had been murdered. In Penn-sylvania, and many other jurisdictions, it is a gen-eral rule that the prosecution has the burden of

proving that a crime has been committed before the

jury proceed to inquire as to who committed it. Thatmeans that in a murder case, it must first be shownthat somebody is really dead. This is ordinarily a

question for the court and not for the jury. A con-

viction cannot be sustained unless the corpus delicti,

as it is technically called, be clearly established.

Instances have occurred where a person has beenconvicted of having killed another, and where, after

the supposed criminal has been put to death for the

supposed offense, the man alleged to have been mur-dered has made his appearance alive. The wisdomof the rule is therefore obvious. Of course if this

rule as to establishing the corpus delicti, had beenrigidly adherred to in the Trial of John Jasper, it

might have been necessary for the trial judge to havetaken the case from the jury. It was, therefore,

deemed better to allow the jury to consider the entire

question, and to say from all the evidence whether

—

(1) there was enough to establish a death; and (2)

—whether such death was caused by the criminal

agency of John Jasper.

As already stated, eleven of the jury declared thatthere was not sufficient evidence to warrant a ver-

dict of guilty. In a regularly constituted court of jus-

tice, of course, there could not have been a convic-

37


tion under the evidence ; but when one considers the

character of the jury at the Academy and remem-bers that the corpus delicti was not required to beproven, in a strictly legal manner, but that the lay

mind was allowed to draw any inference it chose

from the evidence, then it is fair to assume that the

vote of this jury represents the average opinion of

men of more than average intelligence who havehad both sides of the question fully presented to

them. Such being the case then "The Mystery of

Edwin Drood" takes its place alongside of those

other great historical literary mysteries. There are

a great many of them. The mystery of the Man in

the Iron Mask, whose mask, we are told, was not

iron at all but velvet, still fascinates the young andthe old. The murderer of Sir Edmund Berry Godfreyhas never been identified, though three guiltless menhave been hanged for the supposed crime. The au-

thor of the "Letters of Junius" is still unknown,although many people suppose him to have been Sir

Philip Francis. There is still much discussion as

to the identity of James de la Cloche and whetherhe was what he claimed to be or a rank imposter.

Then we have UAffaire du Collier, the old familiar

story of Jeanne de Valois, Cardinal Rohan, Caglios-

tro, Marie Antonette and the diamond necklace. Whoamong us has not speculated upon this most fascin-

ating episode in French history? Who has not sym-pathized with the beautiful Queen ?

Some people doubt that the Bard of Avon "wrote

Shakespeare." The Baconian Creed, in regard to the

Shakespeare plays, has been advocated in hundredsof books and pamphlets. It is scouted by most of us,

but "there are foolisher fellows than the Baconians"says a sage

—"those who argue against them." Thelist of famous mysteries is long and interesting—too

long to be recited here. It is with the trial of JohnJasper at the Academy of Music that we are con-

38

INTRODUCTION

cerned, and not with these other mysteries, so wemust confine ourselves to that question.

There is one celebrated mystery, however, that de-

serves special mention. Who does not recall the

controversy over the antiquarian discovery made byMr. Pickwick wherein seventeen learned societies

participated ? We are told that to this day the stone

which the great Pickwick discovered, near the

Leather Bottle at Cobham, remans an illegible monu-ment of his greatness and a lasting trophy to the

littleness of his enemies.

In concluding this introduction let us pay tribute to

the genius of him who has added much to the happi-

ness of our lives. All honor to Charles Dickens, the

master of humor and pathos, the kindly engen-

derer of the Christmas spirit, the propounder of

the unsolved riddle of the Mystery of Edwin Drood.

His name still lives because of the vitality of his

works, and their perennial freshness and graphic

character delineations. His imagination, his fancy,

his wit, his keen observation, and his wonderful

descriptive powers, united with a charming spirit

of universal brotherhood, prove his right to sleep

in the old Abbey undisturbed by any earthly thing

save that homage which belongs to the honored

dead.

John M. Patterson

Philadelphia, March 14th, 1916.

39

Trial of John Jasper

for the Murder of Edwin Drood

Court Crier : O Yea ! Yea ! Yea ! All mannerof men who stand bound by recognizance or other-

wise have to do before the Honorable, The Judges

of the Court of Oyer and Terminer, General Jail

Delivery and Quarter Sessions of the Peace, at the

Assizes here holden this day for the County of Phil-

adelphia, may now appear and they shall be heard.

God save the Commonwealth and this HonorableCourt.

The Court: The Court will now announce its

rules. The jurors, the counselors, the witnesses,

and the audience, as a rule, are not expected to

applaud in a court of justice. That rule will be

suspended to-night, so far as the audience is con-

cerned, but it will apply to all the witnesses and to

the jurors who are selected to try the case.

The Clerk will now proceed to call the list of

jurors.

Court Clerk: Gentlemen of the jury, as your

names are called, you will arise, and answer present.

C. C. A. Baldi (Present)

Martin V. Bergen (Present)

Rudolph Blankenburg (Present)

William Findlay Brown (Present)

Martin G. Brumbaugh (Present)

Henry Budd (Present)

William A. Carr (Present)

J. H. Carstairs (Present)

F. T. Chandler (Present)

J. Chalmers Da Costa (Absent)

40

DRAWING THE JURY

Thomas A. DalyJohn B. DeaverGeorge W. ElkinsWilliam R. EllisonNathan T. FolwellJohn Marshall GestJohn GribbellJohn F. HanekerM. F. HansonC. C. HarrisonA. G. HetheringtonMorris Jastrow, Jr.

Alba B. JohnsonC. F. KavanaghGeorge W. Kendrick, Jr.

James W. KingFrancis A. LewisJohn Luther LongJoseph B. McCallJohn H. McFaddenJohn B. McMasterCharles R. MillerLeslie W. MillerThomas E. MurphyWm. R. NicholsonJ. Parker NorrisThomas K. OberEllis P. OberholtzerGeorge W. OchsSamuel W. PennypackerGeorge Wharton PepperA. S. W. RosenbachSamuel P. RotanTheodore C. SearchEdgar F. SmithS. Solis-CohenWilliam H. StaakeJohn Thomson

41

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)(Present)

(Absent)(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Absent)(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Present)

(Absent)(Absent)(Present)


William T. Tilden (Present)

Floyd W. Tomkins (Present)

Charlemagne Tower (Present)

J. William White (Present)

Gentlemen of the jury, have you all answered to

your names?Jurors : We have.

The Court: The Court will now proceed to call

the list for trial.

Commonwealth v. John Jasper. Are you ready?

Mr. Bell: Trial for the Commonwealth.The Court : What say counsel for the defence ?

Mr. Scott: The defence is ready.

The Court: Officer, produce the prisoner.

(John Jasper is placed in the prisoner's box.)

The Court: The Clerk will now proceed to ar-

raign the prisoner.

Court Clerk: John Jasper, stand up.

John Jasper, hearken unto an indictment, pre-

sented by the Grand Inquest of the Commonwealthof Pennsylvania, inquiring for the County of Phila-

delphia, charging you with the murder of EdwinDrood. How say you,—guilty, or not guilty ?

John Jasper: Not guilty.

Court Clerk: How will you be tried?

John Jasper: By a jury of my peers and by the

law of Pennsylvania.Court Clerk : And may the law send you a safe

deliverance.

John Jasper, you are now set to the Bar of the

Court for trial, and these good men whose namesyou will hear called, will pass between the Com-monwealth and you on trial. You have the right to

challenge twenty of them peremptorily and as manymore as you show cause for challenge.

The Court: The Clerk will now proceed to call

the jury, in order that twelve jurors may be selected

42

Some of the VeniremenReading from left to right. Top row: L. W. Miller, J. W. White. M. F. Hanson, H. Lovett, F. A. Lewis, T. K. Ober. J. 1!. McMaster, M. V. Bergen, J. M. Gest,

Middle row : J. W. King, J. P. Norris. Charlemagne Tower. Henry Budd, S. W. Pennypaeker- O. W. Keixriek. A. S. \V. Rosenbach. Rev. C. F. Kavanagh. E. F. Smith, J. Gribbell, C. R. Miller, W.

Bottom row ; C, C. A. Baldi, N. T. Folwell, W, A, Cam J. F, Huneker. S. P. Rotan, \. G. Hetherington, W. R, Ellison, J. H. Carstnirs, J. B. McCall, G. w. Elkins.

DRAWING THE JURY

to pass upon the guilt or innocence of the prisoner

at the bar. The Clerk will proceed.

Court Crier: No. 1, John Bach McMaster.Court Clerk: Come forward, please. As the

jurors names are called, they will walk forward,

and present themselves at the bar of the court.

The Court: I should like to suggest that they dothis as expeditiously as possible, in order that timemay be saved.

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner;

prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal-

lenge or no challenge?

Mr. Scott: No challenge.

Mr. Bell : I desire to ask a few questions of the

gentleman on his voir dire.

The Court: Proceed with the examination.

By Mr. Bell :

Q. Do you know anything about this case in

which John Jasper is charged, in the Bill of Indict-

ment, with the murder of his nephew, EdwinDrood?

A. Nothing but hearsay.

Q. Has what you have heard made any lasting

impression upon your mind as to his guilt or inno-

cence?

A. No lasting impression.

Q. Have you any conscientious scruples against

capital punishment?A. None whatever, when it is deserved.

Q. Then if you were selected as a juror in this

case, you could go into the box and hear the evi-

dence, and under the Charge of the Court, render

an unbiased verdict?

A. I should try to ;yes.

Q. You are a historian, aren't you ?

A. Yes.

Q. May I respectfully suggest that should youwrite a history of the world to-morrow, or the day

43


following, that you should record this as one of the

great epoch-making events in international peace

and justice? I have no doubt that counsel for the

defence and his Honor joins in that request.

The Court: The request is granted.

(Juror is seated in the jury box.)

Court Crier: No. 2, George W. Elkins.

Juror look upon the prisoner; prisoner look uponthe juror. How say you, challenge or no challenge?


Mr. Bell : A few questions upon his voir dire, sir.


By Mr. Bell:Q. Are you of Saxon blood, sir?

A. Either that or Irish.

Q. Don't you know, sir?

A. I have not discovered yet.

MR. Bell: Well, I think I will pass him.

(Juror seated in jury box.)

Court Crier: No. 3, James W. King.




Mr. Scott : No challenge.

Mr. Bell: "Could you walk with kings, nor lose

the common touch?"

A. I could.

Mr. Bell: Take a seat in the box.

(Juror seated in jury box.)

Court Crier: No. 4, A. G. Hetherington.





44

DRAWING THE JURY

By Mr. Bell:Q. Did you say your name was Beau Brummel?A. Yes.

Mr. Bell: I fear were I to challenge him, sir, I

might bring down his gray hairs in sorrow to the

grave. Therefore I shall not.

(Juror takes seat in the jury boy.)

Court Crier: No. 5, William Findlay Brown.




Mr. Scott: I desire to examine the juror uponhis voir dire.


By Mr. Scott:

Q. You are an assistant district attorney, aren't

you?A. On the first of every month, when pay day

comes around; yes.

Q. Your principal work has been the hanging of

men, hasn't it?

A. No ; I think I am the great American Shooer-

Out.*

Q. How long have you been connected with the

District Attorney's Office?

A. About seven years.

Q. Do you feel that you could sit in the jury box

and actually acquit a man charged with murder?(Applause and laughter.)

A. I might acquit the defendant, but I certainly

could not acquit his counsel.

Mr. Bell: I ask that this juror be sworn.

Mr. Scott: I object to this juror. I do not think

he is worthy of being a juror. He has shown not

*Mr. Brown, an assistant district attorney, bears the repu-

tation of being very merciful and very fair.

45


only his feeling toward the defendant, but his bias

towards counsel for the defendant.

The Court : Juror, turn to the Court. Could yougo into the jury box, hear the evidence, and decide

the case upon its merits, without regard to yourprofessional training (laughter) or your other con-

victions ?

A. Absolutely.

The Court: The juror is qualified. Let him havehis seat.

(Laughter.)

(Juror takes his seat in the jury box.)

Tipstaves: Silence! Silence!

The Court: The officers of the Court will please

preserve silence.

Court Crier: No. 6, Rudolph Blankenburg.(Applause.)




Mr. Bell : No challenge. I would not dare do so.

Mr. Scott: I desire to examine the juror on his

voir dire.


By Mr. Scott:Q. You are Mayor, aren't you?A. I am a servant of the public. Sometimes they

are called Mayor.Q. Would you be influenced in your finding in this

case, if it came to your attention that another great

Mayor, Mayor Sapsea, of Cloisterham, were called

upon the witness stand to testify in behalf of the

defence?

A. Would that influence me?Q. Would that influence your verdict?

A. Nothing influences me except what is right.

(Applause.)

46

DRAWING THE JURY

Q. As a German, do you have such prejudice

against an Englishman as to influence your judg-ment in rendering a verdict against him?

A. I have not, because the Englishman is a de-

scendant of the German.(Applause.)

Q. Well, Mr. Mayor, notwithstanding the acci-

dent of birth (laughter), could you go into the jurybox and render an impartial verdict upon the evi-

dence, even if the life of an Englishman were at

stake?

A. Most assuredly.

Mr. Scott: May it please your Honor, I object to

this juror. I do not think he is qualified. I do not

think he has shown sufficient knowledge of his

duties as an American citizen to qualify him to sit

in an American jury.

The Court: It is true that this juror is of Ger-man birth, but he belongs to a race that believes in

the supremacy of law, devotion to duty, and loyalty

to the cause of good government. The Court knowsthis juror will do his duty as an American citizen,

with pride and affection for the state of his adop-tion. The objection is overruled.

(Applause.)

Juror takes his seat in the jury box.

Court Crier: No. 7, Edgar F. Smith.





Mr. Bell: I should like to have it noted uponthe record that Fate tried to conceal him by naminghim Smith.

(Laughter.)

The Court : It is all right for the counsel to makethe remark, but it need not be recorded.

(Laughter.)

47


The juror will take his seat.

Mr. Bell : No ; I should like to examine him uponhis voir dire.

The Court: I beg pardon, but counsel must pro-

ceed expeditiously.

By Mr. Bell:Q. You are Provost of the great University of

the Commonwealth.A. I am.Q. I believe that the sun never sets on the sons

of Penn?(Applause.)

A. That is true.

Q. Did you ever have John Jasper or EdwinDrood enrolled upon the records of the University?

(Laughter.)

A. Never, sir.

Q. Then I apprehend that the love and partiality

that you bear for all the sons of Penn would not, of

course, obtain in this case?

A. It would not.

Q. And you could render an unbiased verdict?

A. I could, sir.

(Juror takes seat in jury box.)

Court Crier: No. 8, George Wharton Pepper.





Mr. Bell: May I rise to a question of privilege,

sir?

The Court: Proceed.

Mr. Bell : I feel it my duty in the interest of fair

play to say to counsel on the other side that this

gentleman is a great, not to say marvelous, baseball

lawyer. He recently convinced a judge, a Federal

judge, that if a ball player, a Federal ball player,

48

DRAWING THE JURY

came into court to play the game, he must do it with

clean hands. It is a marvel how an ordinary ball

player can play the game with clean hands.*

Ey Mr. Bell:Q. Do you believe that this defendant could come

into court with clean hands?A. That is a question that I can answer when I

have heard the evidence, but not until then.

Q. If he should have clean hands, and a pure

heart, of course you would acquit him?A. Yes.

Mr. Bell: His hands are soiled. Take your seat

in the box.

Mr. Scott: I desire to interrogate the juror.

The Court : Proceed with the examination.

By Mr. Scott:Q. You being a man trained in baseball playing,

have you any thought of running for Governor.t(Laughter and Applause.)

Tipstaves: Silence! Silence! Order in the court.

A. That is not within the circle of my ambition.

Mr. Scott: The juror is accepted.

By Mr. Bell:Q. You believe, however, in the doctrine of pre-

cedent, don't you?A. Properly applied, as the Court will apply it.

*At the date of the trial, war was being waged by the newlyorganized Federal League against "Organized Baseball."The Federal League induced "Reindeer" Killifer, a player ofexceptional skill, to break his contract with the PhiladelphiaClub and to sign a contract with the Federals. When hesubsequently changed his mind the Federals undertook to

restrain him by injunction from playing with the PhiladelphiaClub. Mr. Pepper appeared for Killifer and the PhiladelphiaClub. It was held that the Federals came into court with un-clean hands and were not entitled to the relief prayed for.See Weeghman et al vs. Killifer et al, 215 Fed. Rep. 289(1914).

fThe then Governor of Pennsylvania, Honorable John K.Tener, had been a baseball player, and is now president ofthe National Baseball League.

49


The Court : Counsel will observe the rules. First,

counsel for the prosecution may examine; thencounsel for the defense, if he thinks proper. Thenthe examination ceases. Let order be preservedin this examination. The Court desires to say to

the juror that nothing developed in the examinationof this juror disqualifies him to sit in the case. TheCourt knows his fidelity to duty, his patience in

working out the details in a case, and feels con-

strained to say that he meets the requirements of

the law in every particular.

Juror takes seat in the jury box.

Court Crier : No. 9, Samuel W. Pennypacker.(Applause.)





Mr. Bell: No challenge, sir.

Juror takes seat in jury box.

Court Crier : No. 10, J. Parker Norris.




Mr. Scott: I desire to examine the juror on his

voir dire.


By Mr. Scott:

Q. Have you read the account of the chargeagainst the prisoner, Jasper, as recorded by the

reporter, Dickens?A. I have not.

Q. Have you formed any opinion, or expressed

any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of JohnJasper?

A. None whatever.

50

DRAWING THE JURY

Mr. Scott: Satisfied. No challenge.


Court Crier: No. 11, Charlemagne Tower.Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner;


lenge or no challenge?Mr. Scott : No challenge.

By Mr. Bell:Q. Do you know, sir, that there is a "tower" in

this case?

A. No, sir; I do not know it.

Q. Have you ever had any intimate acquaintancewith London Tower?

A. No, sir; not myself.

Q. Do you happen to know, just as a matter ofhistoric interest, when Marmion shook his gauntletat the towers, whether he was indicted for treasonby your family?

A. It was not a near relative of mine.

Q. Do you know anything about this case?A. No, sir; nothing whatever.Mr. Bell: If the Court please, as this witness

seems to have no acquaintance with London Tower,and a lack of knowledge generally, I think he wouldmake a good juror.

The Court: The observations of the counsel arenot proper as a test of the qualifications of a juror.

The juror is eminently qualified to sit in this case,

and he will take his place in the box.

Mr. Bell: I beg your Honor's pardon for appar-ently throwing you into a towering rage.


Court Crier : No. 12, J. William White.

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner;prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal-


51


Mr. Scott : I desire to examine the juror uponhis voir dire.

By Mr. Scott:Q. You are sometimes known as Dr. White, aren't

you?A. I have been called so.

Q. One time you were connected with the Univer-sity of Pennsylvania?

A. I still am.Q. And I suppose you are acquainted with the

medical staff of the University of Pennsylvania?A. Very well.

Q. Have you heard any recent discussion there of

vivisection, Doctor?*

A. I have heard much discussion of it, some of it

from counsel for the defence.

Q. Since the discussion that you heard, have youlost faith in the jury trial?

A. My faith was somewhat weakened, but not

destroyed.


Mr. Bell : Pardon me, sir. This examination hasbeen very circumscribed. This is an international

case.

By Mr. Bell:Q. I would like to know of you, as a physician,

whether you have ever suffered from Anglo-mania?A. No, sir ; and I resent the imputation.

Q. Well, you at least have been inoculated with

Anglo-mania?A. Not that I am aware of.

Q. Why, haven't you rubbed elbows with those

fellow members of the Reform Club in London andthe Aberdeen University, and worn the red coat

*A University of Pennsylvania professor had but recently

been indicted and tried for cruelty to animals—the case grow-ing out of the vivisection of certain animals. Mr. Scott hadrepresented the private prosecution.

52

SWEARING THE JURY

which is very like the Justice's, and you mean to

say you were not inoculated?

A. It is not catching.

Q. Well, you wore this Scotch red coat, didn't

you?A. I did.

Mr. Bell: Ah, you did. If the Court please, I

hae me doots about this juror, and ye're challenged.

The Court: The questions are not a proper test

of the qualification of a juror. The challenge is

overruled, and the juror will take his seat in the

jury box.

(Juror takes seat in jury box.)

Court Crier: The jury box is full.

The Court: Let the jurors be affirmed.

Court Clerk: You and each of you do declare

that you will well and truly try, and a true deliver-

ance make, between the Commonwealth of Pennsyl-vania and the prisoner at the Bar, John Jasper,

whom you will have in charge, and a true verdict

render according to the evidence. And so you andeach of you do declare.

The Court: The Clerk will proceed to read the

indictment.

Court Clerk: "In the Court of Oyer and Ter-

miner and General Jail Delivery in and for the

County of Philadelphia. April Sessions, 1914.

County of Philadelphia, ss. The Grand Inquest of

the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, inquiring for

the County of Philadelphia, upon their respective

oaths and affirmations, do present, that John Jas-

per, late of the County of Kent, United Kingdom of

Great Britain and Ireland, on the 25th day of De-cember, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight

hundred and fifty-one, at the County aforesaid, andwithin the jurisdiction of this Court, with force andarms, etc., in and upon the body of one, EdwinDrood, in the peace of said Kingdom then and there

53


being, feloniously, wilfully, and of his malice afore-

thought, did make an assault, and him, the said

Edwin Drood, then and there feloniously, wilfully

and of his malice aforethought, did kill and murder,contrary to the law and against the peace anddignity of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

(Signed) John C. Bell, Attorney General."

To this indictment the prisoner at the Bar, JohnJasper, pleads "Not guilty," and for trial hath put

himself upon a jury of his peers and the law of

Pennsylvania. If you find the prisoner at the Bar,

John Jasper, guilty, you will say so. If you find

the prisoner at the Bar, John Jasper, not guilty, youwill say so, and no more. Good men and true, stand

together and hearken unto the evidence.

The Court: The Attorney-General for the Com-monwealth of Pennsylvania will open for the Com-monwealth.MR. Bell : With submission to your Honor : most

potent, brave and reverend seniors; my very noble

and approved good jurors: this is an extraordinary

trial scene, and as I glance around everything andeverybody seems to have gone to the Dickens.

(Laughter.) One circumstance moving me to say

so is the spectacle witnessed, for the first time in

more than a quarter of a century at the bar, of

some of the foremost citizens of the Commonwealthdoing jury service. (Laughter and applause.) Forthe moment, I can conjure up no reason except

that the prisoner has demanded to be tried by a jury

of his peers. (Laughter.) And then, ladies andgentlemen, I take it that your presence indicates that

that great sympathetic soul, interest in whose vale-

dictory story has brought us hither to-night, has

left a very strong love in the grateful hearts of the

English speaking race. (Applause.) With a com-

mon lineage, language, literature and law, whatmore conclusive evidence of that comity that exists

54

John C. Bell

Counsel for Prosecution

OPENING ADDRESS OF PROSECUTION

between the two nations could there be? Certainrecent official utterances in Washington about in-

volved foreign complications (pardon the anachron-ism) to the contrary notwithstanding. It is provenin this cause celebre, in which England, waivingextradition, has indicated her willingness and desire

that this notorious personage should be tried in the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, before a Justice

of her Supreme Court, sitting at nisi prius here in

the Court of Oyer and Terminer of this County. Awild anachronism, to be sure (laughter), but whowould judge a judge by his ermine?John Jasper, therefore, stands before you,

charged in this Bill of Indictment with the willful,

deliberate and premeditated murder of his nephew,Edwin Drood, and as Attorney-General of theCommonwealth, it has now become my duty to

briefly lay before you the story of his crime, withspecial reference to the place, the prisoner's char-

acter, the time, the motive and the incriminatingcircumstances, in order that you may listen under-standing^ and intelligently to the evidence as it

shall be developed before you, item by item, until it

fixes upon the brow of that defendant, even as in

that primal murder, Cain's crime, the indelible andimmutable stamp of guilt.

And first, then, as to the place. It was in the old

town of Cloisterham, in Kent County, the distin-

guishing feature of which was the Cathedral, withits tower, and its crypt or sub-basement, aroundthe walls of which were myriads of vaults in whichthe dust of the dead had been interred for centuries.

You will probably believe, under the evidence, thatit was in one of those ancient tombs that JohnJasper concealed the corpse of his murderednephew.As for the character of John Jasper, we will

prove to you, gentlemen, that it was hypocritical

—

55


is hypocritical, infamous, murderous. The crimi-

nality of Bill Sykes and Carter, and the Le Fargespales into insignificance before it.

He was the organist, the leader of the choir, in

the Cathedral, and yet we will prove to you that

ever and anon, between the sacred services, he stole

off, a la Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (pardon the

anachronism) to a den of iniquity in East London,kept by Princess Puffer, who is here in court to-

day, and that he there gave himself up to opiate

debauches and gave vent to murderous mutterings

and threats against his nephew, Edwin Drood.

To Edwin, he was connected not only with ties

cf blood, but he was his guardian and trustee ; stood

to him in loco parentis and demonstrably professed

for him the most enduring affection. Yet we will

prove to you that he murdered him, and that the

time was Christmas Eve. 'S blood ! Of all days in

the year, Christmas Eve! And the motive wasfiendish jealousy of his nephew. He entertained a

murderous love for one Rosa Bud, a retiring little

girl to whom Edwin Drood was betrothed, and whoattended a school kept by Miss Twinkleton there

in Cloisterham. Jasper gave her music lessons, andtaking advantage of these occasions, he made secret,

fervent love to her, subjecting her to his Svengalian

looks and his hypnotic power until she feared anddreaded him. Now of his love he did not dare to

tell a thing to Edwin. That is the motive.

And now as to the incriminating circumstances

that substantiate his guilt. And right here let metell you that the great chief justice of our SupremeCourt, Gibson, has declared that circumstantial evi-

dence (and it is with such evidence that we shall

prove his crime) is often in the concrete infinitely

stronger—"infinitely stronger" are his words—thanpositive testimony. And given a case like this,

where each item of the circumstantial evidence is

56


inconsistent with innocence, and leads, step by step,

to the conclusion of guilt, that conclusion is unas-sailable.

Let me hastily call your attention to some of the

essential items of this circumstantial evidence as weshall produce it before you.

Now, gentlemen, when an arch fiend like this de-

fendant contemplates a murder, he naturally thinks

of some place wherein he can make disposition of

the body without discovery. And so we shall proveto you how he maladroitly endeavored to get fromone Durdles, a dissolute character, a stonemason,who is here in court to-day, the keys to this crypt or

sub-basement, with its myriads of vaults, and howhe clandestinely induced this man Durdles to takehim down into that crypt at midnight, and there hemade Durdles drunk with liquor he had taken for

that purpose. Immediately he laid down in a

drunken stupor, enabling Jasper to abstract the

keys and spend several hours in the exploration of

this crypt. And then at two o'clock in the morning,emerging from the crypt, we will prove to you that

a boy named Deputy was on the watch, and he flew

at him with demoniacal rage, and would havestrangled him then and there, had not Durdles,

drunk as he was, interfered. And we shall submitto you that that evidence is absolutely inconsistent

with innocence.

Now, further, when an arch fiend like Jasperplans a murder, he seeks to cast suspicion uponanother, and we will prove to you how he sought to

engender suspicion against a young man namedNeville Landless, who is here in Court to-day, andwho was a pupil of Canon Crisparkle, who was theminor Canon there at the Cathedral. How, takingadvantage of a slight quarrel between Neville andEdwin, and under the pretence of acting as a peace-

maker, he mulled a cup of wine, and fanned the

57


flame of jealousy, after the boys had drunk it, into

a white heat, and then forthwith made murderousaccusations against Neville.

I have not the time to give you the details of thestory now. Neville Landless is here, and the Rev-erend Crisparkle, and you will hear it from their

lips on the witness stand. Suffice to say that apivotal point of this story was a reconciliation din-

ner which the good Canon Crisparkle practically

forced Jasper to give to these two boys, and he gaveit on Christmas Eve. Everything passed off skill-

fully and safely at the dinner. The boys were rec-

onciled, and after dinner was over they walkeddown to the river, about twelve o'clock, to see astorm that was brewing there, and they returned,

as Neville will tell you, to Canon Crisparkle's house,

where Edwin bade Neville good-bye, a friendly good-

night, and said he was going straight home to Jas-

per's house. That was the last time he was seen

alive.

The next event was in the morning, eight hours orthereabouts, afterwards, when Jasper burst into acrowd of townspeople who were standing looking

at the tower, and, panting, and half dressed, hedemanded "Where is my nephew? Where is Neville

Landless ? He was last seen in his company at mid-night. Where is Neville Landless?" And with this

murderous accusation, forthwith a hue and cry wasraised, and they started after Neville Landless, whohad left on a walking trip that morning, in accord-

ance with a plan that had been made theretofore.

Well, they overtook him on this walking trip, andJasper repeated his murderous accusations, withthe result that Neville was placed under arrest. Thegood Canon became his sponsor. They brought himback before Mayor Sapsea, and there was a hear-

ing, and he was detained, and redetained, and finally

discharged for lack of evidence.

58


Now I have reason to believe that in the develop-

ment of this case by the cross-examination of theCommonwealth's witnesses, and the examinationof the witnesses for the defence, it will be sought to

re-engender these vile suspicions against this inno-

cent lad, and it is proper, therefore, that I should

say to you that in listening to that evidence youshould remember that every item of such suspicious

evidence, every prejudicial thing against Neville

Landless, was heard before Mayor Sapsea, a monu-ment of stupidity and conceit (laughter), who is

also in court, who was absolutely dominated by this

wily defendant, and yet Neville Landless was re-

leased, and discharged. Now that is a chapter of

this accusation in this case that will inevitably re-

bound and recoil upon this defendant.

Now let me retrace my steps, and bid you takeup another thread of the story. On December 23rd,

Edwin Drood came up from London to see Rosa.

They had been betrothed by their parents, and the

betrothal was more or less irksome. For that reasonthey took a walk along the river, and they stoppedunder the elm trees near the Cathedral and there

they agreed that they would break their betrothal,

and that thereafter their relations should be that of

brother and sister, and they kissed each other, affec-

tionately, good-bye, under the elm tree. As theydid so, mark you, looking up, they saw the defendantpeering at them under the trees, and then he clan-

destinely followed them to the gate.

Now we will submit to you, in the light of thesurrounding circumstances which will be developed,

that he interpreted that kiss as the seal of their

betrothal, and of the promise of the consummationof their marriage in the following May, and in fiend-

ish jealousy that night he betook himself to PrincessPuffer's den of iniquity in London. He returned the

next day and the Princess Puffer followed him. It

59


was twilight. She lost him, and she stopped nearthe Cathedral. And then, call it Fate, or Destiny,or Providence, or what you will, along came EdwinDrood, and she asked him for a three and sixpence,

and he told her his name was Edwin, and she said

to him, "Do sweethearts call it Eddie?" And hesaid, "I have no sweethearts." We will prove to

you that Rosa always called him "Eddie," but yourecall the engagement was broken the day before.

Then she said to him, mark you, gentlemen, "Youshould be thankful your name ain't Ned." "Why,"said he. "Because 'Ned' is a bad name, a threatenedname, a dangerous name." "Oh," said he, lightly,

"the proverb says that threatened men live long."

"Then," said she, "Ned, wherever he may be, so

threatened is he, even while I am speaking to you,

dearie, he should live to all eternity."

Gentlemen, that language could mean nothing butthat the hand of death was upon Ned. And we will

prove to you that the only man in all the world whocalled Edwin Drood "Ned" was Jasper. And that

night Ned was murdered! That night Ned wasmurdered

!

Now for another incriminating circumstance, re-

membering that this circumstantial evidence is infi-

nitely stronger than positive testimony. It wasagreed between Edwin and Rosa that she wouldsend for her guardian, Grewgious, and he should

come up and tell Jasper, Edwin's guardian, of the

broken engagement, and he came up the day after

Christmas, or the following day, and he called to

see Jasper at his house in the evening, and mark youwhat happened. He told him of the broken engage-

ment, and this defendant arose from his chair, his

face was leaden, it grew ghastly pale, great drops

of sweat, as if bubbles of steel, appeared upon it.

He shrieked in terror, writhed in agony, swoonedand fell, a mass of miry clothes, upon the floor.

60

PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY

Gentlemen, we will submit to you that that con-duct is absolutely inexplicable on any footing ortheory of excuse, and that it stamps upon him in-

delibly the impress of guilt.

One other item of evidence, and I shall have donewith this recital. We will prove to you, finally, thatthe defendant went to Princess Puffer's house inAugust last, and there, before he had whiffed thepipe, as well as afterwards, when the drug hadloosed his tongue, he unguardedly confessed his

guilt. And when we have proven the story, then,

gentlemen, it will be up to you to vindicate the law,and to demonstrate that England's faith in the ad-ministration of justice in this Commonwealth hasnot been placed in vain. The times are out of joint.

No one could tell what a miscarriage of justice, aninternational calamity, might lead to—perhaps to

intervention or war. (Laughter.) Whereas thetrue verdict will stand, not only as a triumph ofjustice, but as a treaty of peace, and therefore I

shall ask of you gentlemen, under the evidence, averdict of murder in the first degree. (Applause.)

The Court: The Court desires to announce to

counsel that it is now half-past eight o'clock, andthe Court will expect counsel on both sides to close

their testimony by ten o'clock.

Mr. Bell: Right.

Canon Crisparkle, will you take the stand?Mayor Sapsea: I protest against the Canon tak-

ing the stand, sir. I am the first citizen of Cloister-

ham.Mr. Bell: Do you insist upon your prerogative,

sir?

Mayor Sapsea: I do, most positively.

Mr. Bell : All right, Dogberry, take the stand.

61


Prosecution's Testimony—Sapsea

(Mayor Sapsea takes the witness stand.)

By Mr. Bell:

Q. What quadruped in the animal kingdom do

you and Dogberry typify?

A. Not a jackass, like counsel.

Q. You are the Mayor of Cloisterham?

A. I am doing the people of Cloisterham the honor

of being their Mayor.Q. Did you have a preliminary hearing in which

John Jasper and Neville Landless, and the good

townspeople were concerned?

A. I held such a hearing, as the Magistrate of the

ancient Cathedral City.

Q. Neville Landless was arrested, charged with

the murder of Edwin Drood?A. I believe that he was apprehended on the high-

way, and brought before me.

Q. Have you any doubt about it, sir?

A. I always have doubts until matters are proven

to my complete satisfaction.

Q. Look at that record, and see whether it is

yours?A. You will pardon me, sir?

Q. Do not look at the notations, please.

A. That appears to be the record of the prelim-

inary hearing, as it was held before me.

Mr. Bell : I offer this record in evidence.

The Court: Are there any objections?

Mr. Scott : I have no objection.

The Court : The record is accepted.

Mr. Scott: The defence claims its right to recall

this witness.

Mr. Bell: You can have all you want of him.

Enough is as good as a feast.

Mayor Sapsea : I trust that you are through your

feast.

Mr. Bell : I have had enough, sir.

62

PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY—CRISPARKLE

(Canon Septimus Crisparkle called to the wit-

ness stand.) (Applause.)

By Mr. Bell:

Q. What is your vocation, sir.

A. I am minor Canon of Cloisterham Cathedral.

Q. Do you know John Jasper, and did you knowEdwin Drood, and do you know Rosa Bud, Neville

Landless, the Mayor of Cloisterham, and the others

who are cloistered there?

A. I knew them all. They were all citizens of ourcathedral town.

Q. Do you recall the first time that Neville

Landless and Edwin Drood met?A. Yes; they met at my house on the day of the

arrival of Neville Landless and his sister at Clois-

terham.

Q. They met at a dinner at your house?A. Yes, I gave them a little reception dinner.

Q. We will assume the dinner is over. Whatepisode, if any, happened afterwards?

A. At the dinner?

Q. No; afterwards, we are accelerating our pace.

We are through the dinner.

A. There was an unfortunate episode at the din-

ner. Rosa Bud was singing, and she became ex-

cited, and hysterical, and shrieked out, and stopped

singing. She burst into tears.

Q. Who was looking at her with a fixed, hypnotic

gaze at the time?A. John Jasper.

Q. The defendant?A. Yes.

Q. And what did she say in this nervous attack?

A. "I cannot bear this. I am frightened. Takeme away."

Q. Well, well. Now, Mr. Crisparkle, you doubt-

less heard of a quarrel between Edwin and Neville,

63


following this dinner, and that it was renewed at

Jasper's house?A. Yes.

Q. You were not present, however, were you?A. No.

Q. As a matter of fact, however, did not Neville

come to your house immediately afterwards, and tell

you about it?

A. Yes.

Q. What did he say?A. He returned home much distressed and morti-

fied. He said he had begun ill, dreadfully ill; that

he had gone to the dinner, that he drank very little,

but it affected him in the most sudden and strangest

manner, and that Edwin Drood grossly insulted

him, and he came home.

Q. What did you do then?A. I talked with him. I took him to bed, and

when I left him he sobbed.

Q. State whether or not Jasper, the defendant,

saw you immediately after this quarrel?

A. Yes; he came to my house, and said that

Neville Landless had made a murderous attack uponhis nephew.

Q. Well, did you make any effort to bring about a

reconciliation between the two boys?A. I talked with my pupil, Neville Landless, and

he promised me upon his word of honor as a gentle-

man, that he would forgive and forget.

Q. Then what did you do?A. I then went to John Jasper, and asked his aid

in bringing about a reconciliation. At first heseemed perplexed, as if indulging in a close internal

calculation. But later he consented, and arranged

for a dinner for Neville Landless, his nephew, Ed-win Drood, and himself, on Christmas Eve.

Q. And that was to take place when, on Christ-

mas Eve?64

PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY—CRISPARKLE

A. On Christmas Eve, Mr. Attorney-General.

Q. Did Neville go to the dinner?A. Yes ; he left my home to go to the dinner.

Q. And where did he go the next morning?A. He started early on a walking trip that he had

previously planned.

Q. Now what happened the next morning, Christ-

mas morning?A. Christmas morning I was standing at my win-

dow, watching a cluster of townspeople who werelooking up at the tower that had been damaged bya violent storm the night before, when suddenlyJohn Jasper rushed into the crowd, white, half-

dressed, and panting, and said, "Where is mynephew?" And I said to him "Where is yournephew? Is he not with you?" he said "No; he left

last night to go down to the river with Neville Land-less, and has not been back. Where is Neville?" I

then said that Neville had left on this walking trip

in the morning, and he said "Left for a walkingtrip? Let me in; let me in."

Q. What happened after this murderous insinua-

tion?

A. A hue and cry was raised, and he started after

Neville.

Q. Well, did you overtake him ?

A. About eight miles out of Cloisterham.

Q. And Jasper went with you?A. Jasper went with us.

Q. And when you overtook him, what did Jaspersay?

A. Jasper said to him, "Where is my nephew?"Neville Landless replied, "Where is your nephew?Why do you ask me?" He said, "I ask you becauseyou were the last one in his company, and he is notto be found." "Not to be found?" said Neville,

aghast. I then interposed, and asked the boy to

collect his thoughts, and I asked him when he had

65


left Edwin Drood. He said they had gone down to

the river at midnight, on the night before, to look

at the ravages of the storm, and that they had re-

turned in about ten minutes, and that he had left

Edwin Drood at my door, and he said that he wasgoing straight home1

, to John Jasper.

Q. That was about ten minutes after twelve, the

night before?

A. Ten minutes past twelve.

Q. Well, now, Neville was taken into custody,

was he?A. He was taken into custody. The hearing was

before Mayor Sapsea, and I became sponsor for

Neville Landless.

Q. Ah! What, if anything, was said about

searching the river there at the hearing?

A. Mr. Jasper said that he understood that MayorSapsea suggested that the river be dragged, and its

banks rigidly searched.

Q. Had Mayor Sapsea made any such suggestion ?

A. No. He put those words in his mouth.

Q. And what happened after this? Was the river

searched ?

A. The river was searched for two or three days,

and on the morning of the 28th of December I

found a watch and shirt pin at Cloisterham Weir,

two miles above the cathedral.

Q. What then happened?A. I then took Neville Landless, and the jewelry,

and took him immediately to Mayor Sapsea.

Q. And who identified those articles ?

A. John Jasper identified them as the property

of his nephew, Edwin Drood.

Q. And what was done after this, so far as Nev-

ille was concerned?

A. Neville was detained, and redetained, and later

discharged for lack of evidence.

66

u

u

m

& 15en

PROSECUTION—CROSS-EXAMINATION

Q. What, if anything did Jasper say to you after

you found the watch and stick pin ?

A. One morning while he was unrobing in theCathedral, he took his diary from his pocket, andturned the leaves, and handed it to me, in an impres-,

sive manner, pointing to a certain paragraph.Q. And what, in substance, was in that para-

graph ?

A. It was something like this: My dear boy is

murdered. The discovery of his watch and shirt pinconvinces me that he was murdered on that night,

and that his jewelry was removed from him to pre-

vent his identification by its means. All the delu-

sive hopes I had founded on his separation from his

betrothed wife, I give to the winds. They perishbefore this fatal discovery.

The Court : I must remind counsel that it will benecessary to shorten the examination. Proceed.

Cross-Examined.By Mr. Scott:

Q. On the first day of Neville Landless's arrival

at your house, you informed him of the engagementbetween Rosa Bud and Edwin Drood, didn't you?

A. I did, sir.

Q. He seemed to show a resentment as to this,

and spoke of Edwin's apparent air of proprietorshipover Rosa Bud, didn't he?

A. He did; sir.

Q. You were at your house when Neville Land-less returned, after the quarrel at Jasper's gate-

house, weren't you?A. I was.

Q. And you have told, in your examination in

chief, his conversation. Didn't he say to you that

he would have cut down Edwin Drood had he notbeen restrained by this defendant, John Jasper?

A. Yes; he was very angry.

67


Q. And didn't he say that with such force that heclenched his fist and showed his anger towards theyoung man Drood?A. That is true.

Q. Now, Minor Canon, some days after this youmet Neville Landless, and his sister, Helena, alongthe banks of the river, didn't you?

A. I did, sir.

Q. And then you talked to young Landless abouthis conduct towards Edwin Drood?

A. I did, sir.

Q. You told him that he was in the wrong; that

he was the assailant of Edwin, and it was his dutyto apologize to Edwin, didn't you?

A. I did, sir.

Q. And after that interview, didn't this youngfellow, Landless, tell you that he was in love withRosa Bud?

A. He did.

Q. Didn't he tell you that Edwin Drood was unfit

to be betrothed to her?A. In his opinion.

Q. And didn't he say that she was being sacri-

ficed in being betrothed to him ?

A. He did.

Q. He told you in his conversation that he wasof tigerish blood, didn't he?

A. Yes.

Q. And he showed to you that he was of greattemper, didn't he?

A. Yes; at times.

Q. In fact, Mr. Crisparkle, at your first conversa-

tion with this young man he told you that had his

stepfather not died in Ceylon, that he would havemurdered him, didn't he?

A. Yes, he made that rash statement.

Q. Do you remember when young Landless left

68


your house to go over on Christmas Eve to JohnJasper's home, to meet Edwin Drood?

A. I recall the occasion.

Q. Do you remember that he was armed with aheavy walking stick of ironwood ?

A. He took the stick he had purchased to carrythe next day.

Q. You never again saw Landless until he wasapprehended by the citizens, and charged with thedisappearance of Edwin Drood, did you?

A. No, sir.

Q. You told us that young Landless stated thathe had been to the river with Drood the nightbefore, and that he had returned with him to yourhouse. Didn't you suggest that language to himin these words, "Neville, collect yourself." Did younot say this to him, "You left Mr. Jasper's last

night, with Edwin?"A. Yes, I did. Jasper had told me they left to-

gether.

Q. And didn't you suggest to Neville also this:

"You went down to the river together?"A. I did.

Q. So that it was you who told it, and not Neville

Landless?A. It was.Mr. Scott : That is all.

The Court: Call the next witness.

Mr. Bell : One moment, if the Court please.

By Mr. Bell:Q. I want to call your attention to that walk

along the river with Neville and his sister. Didn'the finally agree upon his word of Honor as a gentle-

man that he would meet Edwin half way, and be-

come reconciled?

A. Yes; his better self asserted itself.

Q. And wasn't it as a result of that solemn pledge

69


to you that Jasper brought about this reconcilia-

tion meeting?A. Yes.

Q. What kind of a disposition had this youngman?

A. He was a lad who had been born in Ceylon,

with rash temper, quick to anger, but at heart hewas as gentle and affectionate as a child.

Mr. Scott: I object to that answer. There is

nothing in the record of this case to show that Nev-ille Landless was as gentle as a child, and I therefore

object to that answer, and ask that it be stricken

out.

The Court: Nothing can be testified to in this

except the facts reported in the book. My recollec-

tion is that no such fact is recorded in the book, andtherefore the question and answer may be stricken

out.

By Mr. Bell:Q. Well, he showed the spirit of contrition and

sobbed like a child when you took him to bed, didn't

he?A. He did, after I had talked with him.

Q. Now tell the court and jury what your opinion

is as observing all that took place there in Cloister-

ham, about the guilt or innocence of this youngman, Neville?

Mr. Scott: This is objected to as not being re-

direct examination.Mr. Bell: It is brought out as answering his

cross-examination. I am asking him that which is

in the record.

The Court : The witness can testify to that whichthe record contains.

A. I told the dean that I believed in the perfect

innocence of Neville Landless.

Mr. Bell : That is all.

Mr. Scott: No further questions.

(Applause.)

70

PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY—LANDLESS

Mr. Bell : Neville Landless.

(Neville Landless takes the witness stand.)

By Mr. Bell:

Q. You are the pupil of Canon Crisparkle?

A. I am.Q. You are the Neville Landless to whom he re-

ferred in his testimony a few minutes ago?A. I am.Q. You have heard that testimony, in so far as

it refers to you. In the interest of expedition, is

what he said true and correct?

A. It is. I can tell you about my quarrel withEdwin Drood, if you wish to hear it.

Q. You tell briefly just what your quarrel waswith Edwin Drood, and more particularly what-ever the defendant, Jasper, did, in fomenting that

quarrel.

A. Edwin Drood and I had taken the youngladies home to the school that they were attending

in the Nuns' House, and we came back, and on our

way back I made an innocent reference to EdwinDrood's betrothal. He resented that, and told meto mind my own business.

Q. Then you had a quarrel?

A. I became angry.

Q. And Jasper came up in the interest of peace,

and he asked you to go to his house, and he wouldbrew a cup of peace, a spirit cup?

A. He did.

Q. And you went there?

A. We did.

Q. What happened? Did he act as peacemaker,or was the quarrel renewed?

A. The quarrel was renewed. Shortly after wegot there the first thing that happened was that this

Mr. Jasper threw the light on a portrait that there

was there of Rosa Bud, and she had been the cause

of our quarrel, and that caused irritation. And then

71


in a complacent sort of way he spoke to EdwinDrood of the happiness that was coming to himthrough his marriage, and how Edwin was for-

tunate. And that added to the irritation.

Q. And then he brewed a cup and gave you a

goblet of wine each, didn't he?A. He brewed a cup of mulled wine, and he gave

us a goblet—a goblet to Edwin Drood, and a goblet

to me. And when he brewed it there was muchmixing, and much compounding, over by the fire-

place, and the wine had a strange and unusual effect

upon me. It went to my head; my face becamesuffused. And upon Edwin Drood it had the sameeffect. It went to his head, and his face became suf-

fused. Then my voice became thick, indistinct, andhis voice became thick and indistinct, and there

were some more words, and he said I was not fit

to associate with white people. I took the glass of

wine I had, and threw the dregs in his face.

Q. What I want to know is whether this peace-

maker who asked you there in the interest of peace,

interposed in any way, by word or suggestion, to

stop this game of crimination, and recrimination

until you actually raised your glass to throw it at

him?A. No; it was he who kept the conversation on

the tender subject, and never interfered until I

threw the wine in his face.

Q. Then you went home and told Canon Cris-

parkle that you had behaved ill;you went home and

sobbed?A. Yes.

Q. In this walk along the river, didn't you give

your word of honor as a Christian gentleman that

you would meet Edwin Drood half way, and becomereconciled with him, as a result of which this recon-

ciliation dinner took place that Canon Crisparkle

told about?

72


A. I did, and I gave him my word of honor, andmy most solemn promise as a Christian gentlemanthat the quarrel would be at an end when Edwinwould meet me half way, and he did meet me half

way, and generously and nobly. We agreed together

to let bygones be bygones, in behalf of both of us,

and everything was peaceable at the dinner, as

Jasper himself, who was present, will have to admit.

Q. So that everything went off smoothly and pleas-

antly at this reconciliation dinner, and after it wasover, about twelve o'clock, you and Edwin walkeddown to the river to see the storm?

A. Yes.

Q. And then you came back to Canon Crisparkle's

house, and you bade him a friendly good-night,

about ten minutes after twelve?A. I bade him good-night about ten minutes past

twelve; yes.

Q. I want you to say to this court and jury

whether you are guilty or innocent of this crime?A. Absolutely innocent.

Cross-Examined.By Mr. Scott:

Q. Didn't you tell Mr. Crisparkle, when you re-

turned back from your quarrel with Edwin Drood,that you were so angry at Edwin that you wouldhave cut him down had you not been stopped byJasper?

A. Yes. He said I was not fit to associate withwhite men.

Q. This conversation that you had with Cris-

parkle along the banks of the river, when you weretalking with him as a Christian gentleman, and giv-

ing him your promise as a Christian gentleman,isn't this some of the language that you, as a Chris-

tian gentleman, used? Speaking of Edwin Drood—"husband or no husband, that fellow is incapable

73


of the feeling with which I am inspired towardsRosa Bud."

A. I did.

Q. And didn't you use this language also : "He is

incapable of such feeling, and unworthy of her."

A. I did.

Q. And didn't you, as a Christian gentleman,further say, "I love her, and I despise and hate

him?"A. I did.

By Mr. Bell:Q. And after that you had your reconciliation

dinner, and parted friends?

A. When he said he would meet me half way, I

met him.Mr. Scott: I object—The Court : Call another witness.

Mr. Bell : Come along, Rosa.

(Rosa Bud takes the witness stand.)

By Mr. Bell:

Q. What is your name?A. Rosa Bud.Q. How old are you?A. Nineteen.

Q. Will you try to keep your voice up so the courtand jury and assembled multitude will hear?

A. I will try.

Q. You are a pupil at Miss Twinkleton's school

at Cloisterham?A. I was.

Q. Did you know Edwin Drood?A. Yes; I have known him since we were chil-

dren.

Q. You and he were betrothed, weren't you?A. Yes; by our parents.

Q. Will you please state by what nickname youcalled him?

74

PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY—ROSA BUD

A. I always called him "Eddie."

Q. Do you know John Jasper, the defendanthere?

A. Yes. He was my music master.

Q. Miss Bud, did he ever indicate any love or in-

fatuation for you, and if so, in what manner?A. When I sang, he never moved his eyes from my

lips. When I played, he never moved his eyes frommy hands. When he corrected me, or struck a note

or chord, or played a passage, he himself was in

the sounds, whispering that he pursued me as alover, and commanding me to keep his secret.

Q. Did you ever tell this to Edwin Drood ?

A. No; I never told anyone except Helen Land-less, and Mr. Grewgious.

Q. He was your guardian?A. My dear guardian.

Q. Pardon me, Miss Bud, but did you ever love

this defendant?A. No ; he terrified me. He haunted my thoughts

like a dreadful ghost. I felt that I was never safe

from him. I felt he could pass in through the wall

when he was spoken of.

Q. Don't be alarmed. Don't be alarmed. No onewill hurt you. Go on, please. Go on, Rosa, please.

A. He made a slave of me with his looks. Heforced me to understand him without uttering aword. He forced me to keep silence without his

uttering a threat. I avoided his eyes, but he obliged

me to see them without looking at them.

Q. Did he ever exercise this Svengali-like influ-

ence over you in public?

A. Yes. Once, after dinner, when we had beendining at Mr. Crisparkle's.

Q. That was the instance that Canon Crisparkle

referred to on the stand, and what he said was cor-

rect, was it?

A. It was.

75


Q. He looked at you with this fixed hypnoticgaze, did he?

A. He did.

Q. Do you recall the last time you saw Eddiealive?

A. I do.

Q. Will you relate to the jury the time, and the

circumstances, just how it happened.A. Eddie came down from London, on December

23d, 1851. We took a walk together that afternoon.

We agreed to break our betrothal, and to change ourrelations to brother and sister from then.

Q. Where did you come to this agreement?A. Under the elm tree in the Cathedral Close, on

the afternoon of December 23d, 1851.

Q. And then you tenderly and affectionately

kissed each other good-bye, did you not?A. We did.

Q. And what, if anything, did Edwin say to youjust at that moment, as you were making this affec-

tionate farewell?

A. He cautioned me: "Rosa, don't look around.Did you see Jack?" I said "No; where?" He said

"Under the trees. He saw us take leave of eachother."

Q. And what then happened?A. I hurried Eddie on until we passed out of the

gatehouse into the street, and then I asked "Is hebehind ? You can look without seeming to. Has hefollowed us?" He answered, "No—yes, he has."

Before I went into the Nuns' House I gave Eddie a

wide-wondering look, as much as to say "Don't youunderstand ?"

Q. This Nuns' House was Miss Twinkleton'sschool?

A. Yes. That was the last time I saw Eddie.

Q. The last time you ever saw him alive, eh?

76

PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY—ROSA BUD

Well, when was the next time you saw this defend-

ant here?

A. At the hearing before Mayor Sapsea.

Q. And when was the next time you saw him,and the last time ?

A. Late in the afternoon of June 29th, 1852. Hecalled on me at the Nuns' House. I received him in

the garden, because I was afraid to be with him in

the house. Miss Twinkleton was at a picnic, andthe girls had all gone to their homes.

Q. Did he state why he called to see you ?

A. He said he wanted to know when I would takeup my music lessons again, and I told him I wasresolved to leave off.

Q. What, if anything else, did he say to you onthis visit?

A. He told me over and over again that—that heloved me madly, that he had loved me all the timeEddie was alive, that he had worshipped in tormentfor years my picture that Eddie had sketched andgiven him; that he loved me during the distasteful

work of the day, and through the wakeful misery of

the night.

Q. And what else did he say, Rosa?A. He asked me whether he had not kept his

secret loyally while Eddie was alive, and I answeredhim, with indignation, "You were false, sir, as youare now. You were false to him hourly and daily.

You have made my life unhappy by your pursuit of

me. I was afraid to open Eddie's generous eyes. I

was afraid to tell the truth about you to Eddie," andI told him, "You are a bad, bad, bad man."

Q. And what did he insinuate about Neville

Landless to you?A. Well, he insinuated that Neville was in love

with me, and he said "Judge for yourself whetherany other admirer of yours shall love you and live,

77


whose life is in my hands. Young Landless stands

in deadly peril."

Q. And he referred to the gallows, even as re-

spects an innocent man, didn't he?A. He said "Circumstances may so accumulate,

even against an innocent man, that, sharpened,

directed, and pointed, they may convict him."

Q. And he was talking about Neville Landless

at that time, wasn't he, and his affection for you?A. Yes, he was.

Q. What did he say about his love for his

nephew?A. He said that his love for me was so mad, that

had the love he bore his dear lost boy been one silken

thread less strong, he would have swept even himfrom my path when I favored him.

Q. Did he command you to keep this a secret, andthat he would pursue you to the death, and nothingshould ever come between you?

A. Yes, he did. He said I must not tell a wordof it to anyone, that if I did, it would bring downa blow as certainly as night followed day.

Q. This conversation was in the rose gardenwhere the sun dial was, in front of the Nuns' House,

wasn't it?

A. It was, sir.

Q. And then you were so frightened, that in yourterror you fled to your guardian, Grewgious, in

London, didn't you?A. Yes.

Q. One last question, Miss Bud. Whom did yoususpect as being responsible for Edwin's murder.

The Court: Is that question objected to?

Mr. Scott: We object to the question.

Mr. Bell: It is in the record. I stand upon the

record.

78


The Court: The court will not permit the ques-

tion until the record is produced. It can be admittedlater.

Mr. Bell : Now is the accepted time.

The Court : No argument now.Mr. Scott : We must admit that this suspicion is

in the record.

The Court : The court has ruled, and that is the

end of the matter.

Mr. Bell: Do you admit that it is part of the

record that she suspected this defendant?Mr. Scott: Ask the judge.

cross-examined.By Mr. Scott:

Q. Did Mr. Jasper, at any time before the dis-

appearance of Mr. Drood, express to you any wordsof love?

A. He did not.

Q. The first time that Mr. Jasper expressed his

love for you was some six months after Drood's dis-

appearance, and after his engagement with you hadbeen broken?

A. Actions speak louder than words.

Q. I ask, may it please your Honor, that the ques-

tion and answer be stricken out. Answer the ques-

tion as it is in the book.

Mr. Bell : Answer it as it is in the book, but not

as counsel says. He is not running this trial.

(Question repeated by stenographer as follows:

"The first time that Mr. Jasper expressed his love

for you was some six months after Drood's disap-

pearance, and after his engagement with you hadbeen broken?")

Q. Answer the question yes, or no.

Mr. Bell: With an explanation.

The Court : The witness will answer the question

yes or no.

79


Mr. Bell: Then may she give the explanationaccording to the record?Mr. Scott: Answer the question yes or no. Did

he ever express his love to you in words until six

months after you had broken the engagement withEdwin Drood?

A. He did not.

Mr. Bell: I now ask the witness whether or notshe did not suspect this defendant of the murder.The Court : The Court has examined the record,

and finds it is proper for the witness to answer.By Mr. Bell:

Q. Whom did you suspect of this crime?A. I suspected Mr. Jasper had made away with

him.

By Mr. Scott:Q. You are rather a nervous young lady, aren't

you?Mr. Bell : She is not used to this.

A. If anybody makes me nervous.

(Durdles takes the witness stand.)

The Court: Let the witness be affirmed.

Court Clerk : Put your hand on the book.

You do declare that you will true answers maketo such questions as will be put to you touching thematter now before the court, and so you do declare.

(Witness nods affirmatively.)

By Mr. Bell:Q. What is your name?A. Durdles, sir.

Q. What is your first name?A. Well, sir, it is so long since I heard it, I hardly

know what it is, sir.

Q. Well, without giving your first name, then,

will you tell me whether you know this man Jasper?A. Yes, we have had a drink or two together; we

have, sir.

80

PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY—DURDLES

Q. Where did you have that drink?

A. At Mayor Sapsea's, sir.

Q. And the Mayor, I suppose, took a little onetoo?

A. Yes—not a little one, sir; not a little one.

Q. What did this man here, Jasper, interest him-self in when you were there at Sapsea's?

A. Well, sir, Mr. Jasper, the prisoner there,

wanted to get the crypt keys which I carried in mybag, in my jacket, sir.

Q. He did?

A. Yes ; and the key to Mrs. Sapsea's or Mr. Sap-sea's vault, which I had in my bundle, sir.

Q. Ah, yes! Well, now he tried that while youwere at Mayor Sapsea's?

A. Yes.

Q. And then you left and went home, didn't you?A. Well, I left, sir. But I didn't go right home,

sir. I had to go out and have another drink.

Q. And then you stopped and looked through thatresting place of the ghosts, called the cemetery,didn't you?

A. Well, sir, I felt a bit weary, and I leaned upagainst the iron fence of the burial ground, sir.

Q. And who came along about that time?A. And Mr. Jasper came along, and he wanted

to go home with me, and wanted me to let him carrythe bundle, sir.

Q. He was chivalric enough to want to take youhome, was he?

A. Yes.

Q. Were you able to go home alone? You hadgone, once or twice, I suppose, full and otherwise?

A. Mostly otherwise, sir.

Q. Well, he was interested in carrying yourbundle, wasn't he? This chivalric Jasper!

A. Yes.

81


Q. Did you let him carry it?

A. Yes.

Q. And what did he ask you about the crypt onthe way home, when he was so generously carryingyour bundle containing the keys?

A. He asked me, sir, if there was anything newin the crypt, and I said "Do you mean anythingold, sir?" I says, "It ain't a spot for novelty, Mr.Jasper."

Q. He asked you if you would not take him downthere some night about midnight, didn't he?

A. Yes.

Q. Some moonlight expedition down there in thesub-basement?

A. Yes. He said that Mayor Sapsea suggestedthat he write a book, and he wanted to go up in thetower, and

—

Q. This was another occasion in which he insinu-

ated that Mayor Sapsea was responsible for his sug-

gestions ?

A. Well, he said Mr. Sapsea said so.

Q. Did you go down in the crypt with him?A. Yes; some nights afterwards.

Q. And what did you take with you—what did hetake with him?

A. We went down in the crypt. I opened the

narrow door, and we went down, and we went up thestairs into the tower, and on the way up there Mr.Jasper gave me a bottle, sir, and I gave him the

bundle.

Q. And what was in the bottle?

A. Something good, sir; something good.

Q. Well, you took a swig or two, did you?A. Yes.

Q. How many?A. Oh, I could not count them, sir ; I could not.

82

PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY—DURDLES

Q. Well, you emptied the bottle, didn't you? It

was a wicker bottle, was it not?A. Yes.

Q. He did not take any?A. No ; he said it was extra good, extra strong.

Q. He brought it for your special purpose, eh?A. Yes.

Q. After you emptied the bottle, what happened?A. When we came down into the crypt again I

felt kind of weary, and I wanted to take forty winks,

and then, sir, I passed away. (Laughter).

Q. You laid down by one of the pillars there, anddreamed—you dreamed you dwelt in marble halls?

A. Well, I dreamed, but I cannot exactly say it

was about marble halls.

Q. What was it about?A. I dreamed that somebody had hold of me, and

I felt kind of disturbed, and I felt something fall

on the floor, and something groping about, and thenI got awake, and I found one of my keys lying onthe crypt floor, sir.

Q. And how long had you been in this beautiful

dream, that you said was forty winks long?

A. Two o'clock was striking—two o'clock in the

morning, sir.

Q. And where was Jasper when you awakened?A. I don't know, sir—oh, he was walking up

and down, and I asked him why he didn't awakenme, and he said he did try to awaken me.

Q. Well, now, after you started for home at twoo'clock in the morning, where did you and Jaspergo?

A. We came out of the crypt, sir, and when wegot on the outside, we bumped into Deputy, sir.

Q. That is, this boy they called Deputy?A. Yes.

Q. Then what did Mr. Jasper say?A. Well, when we bumped into him Mr. Jasper

83


says, "What, has that boy devil been watchingthere?" Then he grew violent—furious, sir. Thenhe looked like the very old Devil himself, sir.

Q. Go ahead, sir.

A. He said "Why, I shall shed the blood out ofthat impish wretch—that is what I will do." I said,

"Don't—don't hurt the boy, Mr. Jasper. Recollect

yourself." And that was all there was.

Q. He was about to strangle him in his demoni-acal rage, was he?

A. Yes. Then sir, I went home to get a drink.

Q. And the little boy had done nothing except

stay there and watch, sir?

A. That was all, sir.


Q. When Jasper got your keys at Sapsea's house,

you just gave them to him that he might weigh thekeys in his hand, is that not so?

A. Yes.

Q. And he gave you your keys back?A. Yes.

Q. And you put them, one in your blouse, and onein your bundle, and went your way?

A. Yes.

Q. And it was later in the evening when youwere leaning against the iron fence, or railing, that

Jasper came up?A. Yes.

Q. You were pretty drunk?A. Some, sir.

Q. And Jasper offered to take you home?A. Yes; he wanted to go home with me.Q. And wasn't the reason for him having your

bundle, that you handed it to him,—that you put ft

on the ledge, so that you might take your hammer,and show him how you tapped for the "old un."

84


A. Yes; he asked me for the bundle. He asked

me twice for the bundle, and I gave it to him.

Mr. Bell: He seemed very much interested in

that bundle.

By Mr. Scott:

Q. And you went on home and carried the bundle

(that is, the one under your arm), with you?(Laughter.)

A. Yes.

Q. Now then, it was some considerable time after

that, that you and Jasper went to the tower?A. Yes.

Q. Now it is not an unusual thing for your visi-

tors to bring you a bottle of liquor, is it?

A. No, sir.

Q. In fact you have already said that strangers

who bring liquor for two are once welcome, and whobring liquor for twice two are twice welcome?

A. Yes ; that is right ; that is right, sir.

Q. When you went to the tower, of course youtook this wicker bottle of rum—you, yourself, didnjt

you?A. No, sir ; Mr. Jasper took it.

Q. Didn't Jasper give it to you?A. Oh, yes, sir

;yes, sir.

Q. And then he carried your bundle?

A. Yes.

Q. And as you went into your drunken sleep,

down in the crypt, your bundle was in your posses-

sion, was it not?A. No, sir; Mr. Jasper carried the bundle.

Q. When you awoke from your sleep, was the

key that was lying alongside of you the tomb keyor the crypt key?

A. The crypt key.

Q. It was not the Sapsea tomb key, was it?

A. No, sir.

85


Q. You went home then, from your sleep?

A. Yes.

Q. Now having a dream there in the crypt, onthat occasion, was not the first time you had adream ?

A. No, sir.

Q. Christmas Eve before, you had a drunkendream that you heard the ghost of a shriek, and theghost of the howl of a dog, didn't you?

A. So they said, sir.

Q. Well, you, yourself, said it, didn't you? Youtold that to Jasper, didn't you?

A. Yes.

(Applause.)

(Princess Puffer takes the witness stand.)

The Witness: Oh, my lungs, my lungs is weak.My lungs is weak. Oh, my poor head.

By Mr. Bell:

Q. What is your name ?

A. Why, dearie, they calls me "Her Royal High-ness, the Princess Puffer." Oh my poor lungs is

weak ; oh, my lungs is wore away to cabbage nets.

Q. Where do you live, Princess?A. Live? In London, near the dock, dearie. But

business is slack, is slack. Oh, dear me.

Q. What is your business?A. I'll be honest with you, first and last. Its

opium, and its a human creature, that you canalways hear what can be said against it, but seldomwhat can be said in its praise. Oh, my lungs is

weak, my lungs is bad.

Q. Well, now, quiet yourself, dearie.

(Laughter.) Do you know the prisoner?A. Know him ? Better than all the reverend par-

sons put together know him. Ah, I have mixed

86

--

rt as

PROSECUTION'S—PRINCESS PUFFER

many a smoke for you, first and last, haven't I,

Chuckey? Ah, ha! ha!

Q. Where did you meet the prisoner?

A. In my place, m London, dearie, where I mixesmy opium. I have got the real recipe for mixingthe pipe, haven't I, dearie? Ah!

Q. Princess, when did you see him last?

A. I saw him last singing and chanting in the

cathedral in Cloisterham, in August, 1852.

Q. What were you doing in Cloisterham?A. I went to find him. I could not miss him

twice.

Q. What do you mean by "twice"?A. I had followed him once before, dearie. Yes,

it was while waiting for him that a young gentle-

man gave me the three and sixpence.

Q. What was the young gentleman? Who washe?

A. His name was Edwin, dearie.

Q. How do you know the young man's name wasEdwin?

A. I asked him and he told it me. I only askedhim two questions: What was his Christian name,and if he had a sweetheart. He said "Edwin," andhe hadn't.

Q. Now you tell of your meeting with this youngman, with Edwin.

A. Well, dearie, I was sitting by the Cathedral

gate in Cloisterham on Christmas Eve, when a

young man bent over me, kindly like, and said "Areyou ill?" "No, dearie," says I, "Oh, but my lungs

is weak. Oh, dearie," says I, "Give me three and six-

pence, and I will go back to London and trouble

no one," says I. "But I am in business and it is

slack, it is slack." He looked closely at me, and he

said "Do you eat opium?" "Smoke it," says I.

"Ah, but give me the three and six, dearie, and I

will tell you something." Well, he counts out the

87


money in my hand, and then I says "Hark 'ee, younggentleman, what is your Christian name?""Edwin," he said. "Edwin, Edwin—is the short ofthat name 'Eddie' " says I. "Oh, it is sometimesso called," says he. "Don't sweethearts call it so?"says I. "How should I know," says he. "Haven'tyou a sweetheart, upon your soul?" says I. "None,"says he. "But tell me—there is something you weregoing to tell me." "Well, then, whisper: you bethankful that your name ain't Ned." "Why," sayshe. "Because it is a bad name to have just now,"says I, "a dangerous name, a threatened name.""Ah, the proverb says," he says, "that the threatenedman lives long." "Then, Ned," says I, "so threat-

ened is he, wherever he may be, while I am talkingto you now, he should live to all eternity." Oh, mylungs.

Q. And what did you do then, Princess?

A. Oh, dearie, I said, "Bless you, and thank youfor the three and sixpence." I went and spent thenight at the traveler's lodging house. Oh, my poorhead.

Q. Well, now, steady yourself, Princess, and tell

me when you next saw Jasper?

A. The following August, in my place in London,where I mixed the opium.

Q. And did he have a talk with you?A. He did, dearie.

Q. And what did he say?

A. Well, he threw himself upon the bed, and hetold me to get it ready.

Q. You mean the opium pipe?

A. Yes, the opium pipe, dearie.

Q. And so you mixed it, did you?A. I mixed it, and while I was getting it ready,

he talked to me, and he talked a lot before he got

under the influence, dearie.

88


Q. He did? And what did he say?A. He says "Suppose you had something in your

mind, something you were going to do, should youdo it in your fancy while you were lying here doingthis?" And I said "Over and over again, dearie."

"Just like me," says he. "I did it over and over

again. I have done it hundreds and thousands of

times in this very room." "Ah, it is to be hoped it

was pleasant to do, dearie," says I. "It was pleas-

ant to do," says he. "It was a journey, a difficult

and dangerous journey, a perilous and hazardousjourney, over abysses where a slip would meandestruction." "Is that the journey you have beenaway upon," says I. "That is the journey," says he,

glaring at me, and then he raised to his feet, andsays, "Time and place are both at hand," says he.

"And a fellow traveler too, dearie," says I. "Howcould the time and place be both at hand unless the

fellow traveler was? Hark," says he, "the journey's

made. It is over. Oh, I have done it so manytimes, here in this room, through such vast expansesof time that when it was really done it seemed not

worth the doing, it was done so soon." "So soon,"

says I, "Dearie?" "Yes, that's what I said to you.

It has been too short and easy ; no struggle, no con-

sciousness of peril, no entreaty," and with that he

falls back upon the bed. Oh, my lungs.

Q. Thank you, Princess, thank you.

A. Oh, you are welcome.

MR. Bell: Cross-examine. Not crossly examine.


Q. How long have you been an opium fiend?

A. It was long—a good many years. I cannotremember how long.

Q. And before you became an opium fiend you

89


were Heavens-hard drunk for sixteen years, weren'tyou?

A. Yes, I was, but I took to opium because it

didn't do me so much harm.Q. Those who frequent your den are usually

Chinamen, Knifers, and Lascars, aren't they?A. Yes;» I live along the docks, and so I get them.

Q. You are a beggar, aren't you?A. I sometimes ask for a penny here and there.

Q. Now in reference to these mutterings of this

defendant when he was in your opium den, before

he said a word to you about a journey, he hadstarted to smoke his opium pipe, hadn't he?

A. Oh, he had taken just a few whiffs.

Q. And you filled his second pipe of opium beforehe started to describe his journey. Isn't that so?

A. Oh, yes; but I have a way of mixing it. I

wanted him to talk to me. He thought it was notso potent because he could not get under the influ-

ence, and so I arg'y'd with him : "No ; it is just the

same, dearie, only you have gotten used to takingit now," I said. Ah, but I had learned how to makehim talk. I had learned how,—giving him a little

at a time.

The Court: Proceed.

By Mr. Scott:Q. But you did get him under the influence of

opium, didn't you?A. Oh, yes, yes ; I always did that.

Q. And his eyes were filmy, sometimes closed,

and sometimes opened?A. Yes; that is the way the opium works.

Q. He continued under the influence of opium,though you were attempting, by filling his pipe andarousing him, to make him talk. Is that not so?

A. Yes ; I kept shaking him to make him talk. I

wanted to hear it, and I heard it; I heard it.

Q. And finally he came under the influence of

90

PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY— GREWGIOUS

opium so that he was in a stupor, and you wereunable to arouse him?

A. Yes, after I had heard all I wanted to.

Q. Have you told us all you heard on that occa-

sion?

A. Oh, I might have heard a few other things. I

guess I told you the important things.

Mr. Scott: That is all.

The Court: Proceed. Proceed.

The Witness: Thank you, dearie. I am glad to

get through with this. I thank you.

(Grewgious takes the witness stand.)

By Mr. Bell :

Q. Well, what is your vocation, sir?

A. Being an angular man, I may say I am a solici-

tor.

Q. Angular, but not crooked, I suppose, sir?

A. Angular refers to the disposition. Crookedlikewise refers to the disposition, in some lawyers.

Q. For the defence?A. Not always, sir.

Q. Where do you live?

A. Staple Inn, Holborn, London.

Q. You are the guardian of Rosa Bud, aren't

you?A. I am, sir.

Q. You of course knew Edwin Drood?A. I did, sir.

Q. You knew that he and Rosa were betrothed,

didn't you?A. I did, sir.

Q. They were betrothed by the wills of their

parents ; in their last wills, weren't they?

A. That is so, sir.

Q. Now I want to direct your attention to a visit

you made to Cloisterham on the day after Christ-

91


mas, or the following day. You made that visit,

didn't you?A. I did, sir.

Q. At whose instance did you go up to Cloister-

ham?A. At the instance of my ward.

Q. Rosa Bud?A. Yes.

Q. Did she ask you to convey a message to this

defendant?A. She did.

Q. Did you do so?

A. I did.

Q. You called at Jasper's rooms on the eveningof December 27th?

A. I did.

Q. Now tell the court and jury, without further

inquiry from me, for you are an intelligent witness,

just what happened.

A. I entered the apartment of the prisoner, unan-nounced. He was in his easy chair. His clothing

was disarranged. It was covered with mud. I

spoke to him of the strange disappearance, and after

that I told him I had surprising news, news that

would surprise him, and he turned to me without

a word, and he moved in his chair, and groaned,

and I said to him, "Do you want me to wait until

the morning," and his reply was, "Go ahead," andI started slowly to tell him. I started slowly to tell

him, because I wanted to mark the effect upon himof what I had to say. I told him that my wardand his nephew had determined not to marry; to

break their engagement. His hands

—

Q. Then you told him they had broken it on the

evening of December 23rd, didn't you?

A. I did, sir.

Q. Now what happened when you told him this?

92

OPENING ADDRESS FOR DEFENSE

A. He grabbed the chair with his hands, his face

grew ghastly, and his lips were white and quivering,

a leaden pallor came over his face, and bubbles of

perspiration, like drops of steel, came out on his

cheeks. He arose from his chair with a writhing

motion, he gasped, he threw back his head, and fell

with a terrible shriek upon the floor, a miry massof clothes.

Q. And this was what happened when you simply

told him that Edwin and Rosa had broken their

engagement on the evening of December 23rd.

A. It is so.

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION.

Mr. Bell: The Commonwealth rests.

The Court : The Commonwealth has now closed.

The Court announces a recess for five minutes.

(After Recess.)

The Court: The Court will now be in order.

Counsel for the defence will open to the jury.

Mr. Woodin :

You have listened to the case of the prosecution

in their attempt to prove the prisoner at the barguilty of the crime of murder. Although under the

evidence as presented the defense would be justified

in asking for a verdict of not guilty, without the

presentation of any further testimony, we desire

to give you, gentlemen, the fullest possible oppor-

tunity for inquiry into all the circumstances of this

case, and to that end we shall place the defendant

himself upon the stand.

In order that his testimony, and that of those

who shall testify on his behalf, shall be given proper

effect I wish to suggest to you that while you see

the prisoner in the dock, a place of shame, while

you have heard an indictment charging him with

murder, while there may be passages in the official

93


record which might, to a prejudiced mind, seem tothrow some suspicion on the prisoner, nevertheless,I ask you to remember that this defendant comesupon the stand as a witness, presumably innocent;and I shall ask you to remove from your minds anyresiduum of prejudice which may remain therebecause of the circumstances surrounding this trial

up to the present time.

Invective and accusation are not argument, andas one of the witnesses for the prosecution aptlysaid, "Circumstances may accumulate so stronglyeven gainst an innocent man, that directed, sharp-ened, and pointed, they may slay him." It is withinthe bounds of possibility that anyone, however in-

nocent, might occupy the position in which JohnJasper is now placed, and I shall ask you to con-

sider his testimony with that possibility in mind.We present to you, therefore, in John Jasper, a manpresumably innocent, a man of intelligence, a manof morbid sensibility, a man upon whom his myriadmisfortunes so preyed that he felt himself obliged

to resort to the use of an opiate to keep himselffrom being driven utterly mad. A man boweddown and broken by a grief we can hardly measure,as a result of his loss of one for whom his love hasever remained constant and does so remain to this

day.

I shall ask you to keep in mind that we are not

here to prove the angelic purity of the accused. Weare not here to prove that he had not, as which of

us has not, unworthy aims and unfortunate im-pulses. We are not here to contrast unfavorably his

character and life with that, let us say, of CanonCrisparkle; but we are here to say to you and to

prove by our evidence that this man is not, andcould not be, guilty of the crime of murder, upon all

the evidence which has been, and will be, submitted

for your consideration.

94

Miss Sarah Evansas

Mrs. Tope

DEFENSE—MRS. TOPE'S TESTIMONY

We shall show you by other witnesses the reputa-tion of this defendant as well as the reputation ofthat "child-like" individual whom his fond tutor,

Canon Crisparkle, has done so much to protect. Weshall show you that the so-called suspicious circum-stances brought forward by the prosecution in their

monstrous persecution of this defendant are ex-

plainable as most ordinary and common place. Weshall show you these thing's in order that yourverdict of "Not Guilty" may stand as a rebuke to

those who would seek to take advantage of the unfor-

tunate and persecute the innocent.

The Court: Call a witness and proceed expedi-

tiously.

Defendant's Evidence.

(Mrs. Tope takes the witness stand.)

By Mr. Scott:

Q. You are the wife of the verger at Cloister-

ham?A. I am.Q. You and your husband keep the gatehouse

there, don't you ?

A. Yes; we both kept the gatehouse.

Q. Jasper lives with you?A. He is my lodger.

Q. Of course you know Mr. Jasper?A. Oh, I know him very well.

Q. You have known him for sometime, I under-stand?

A. I have known him quite a number of years.

Q. Do you know other people who know him at

Cloisterham ?

A. Everyone, nearly, in Cloisterham, knows him.

Q. What is his reputation for peace and quiet-

ness?A. He is a quiet, peaceable man. He never loves

any noise or trouble.

95


Q. You knew his nephew, Edwin Drood?A. I knew his nephew well.

Q. What was the relationship?

A. Of friendliness between the uncle and nephew.The uncle was very careful of the health of his

nephew. He was always looking after his comfort.He would look at his feet, even, to see if his shoeswere not damp, and take such trouble with himthat Edwin said he must not mollycoddle him so

much.

Q. Do you remember the evening of December27th, 1851?

A. I do.

Q. Did you see Mr. Jasper that night?

A. Yes; I saw him that night.

Q. That was two days after the disappearanceof his nephew, Edwin Drood, wasn't it?

A. It was.

Q. What was Mr. Jasper's appearance when yousaw him?

A. He was in a swoon on the floor, where he hadfallen when he was told about the estrangement of

his nephew.

Q. When he was told of the engagement beingbroken between Rosa Bud and Edwin?

A. Yes.

Q. Who was there telling him that?

A. Mr. Grewgious was there.

Q. When Jasper lay there on the floor, collapsed,

what was Grewgious doing?

A. Grewgious was sitting there looking at him,

just quite unconcerned.

Q. What had been Mr. Jasper's condition before

his collapse, as to physical strength?

A. Well, he had not eaten anything for a whole

day. He would not eat anything in the morning;he would not eat any dinner, and I told him that

96

DEFENSE—CROSS-EXAMINATION

he would have no strength unless he would eat

something.

Q. He had been engaged for two days, seekingalong the banks of the river for his nephew, Edwin,hadn't he?

A. Yes ; he had been out all that time.

Q. You say his clothes were covered with mud.He had every appearance of exhaustion, hadn't he?

A. Yes; he seemed very much exhausted.

cross-examined.

By Mr. Bell:

Q. Madam, you spoke about the reputation of

Jasper for peace and quiet there in Cloisterham,

didn't you?A. Yes.

Q. What do you know about these visits he madeto London, to Princess Puffer's den of iniquity?

Mr. Scott : That is objected to. There is nothingin the record within the knowledge of this witness

as to this den of iniquity.

Mr. Bell : It is to test her credibility.

The Court: If she knows of the visits, she maytestify; if she does not know, she will say so.

By Mr. Bell:

Q. Do you know anything of these visits of

Jasper, the defendant, to Princess Puffer's opiumden in East London?

A. I know nothing about his visits there.

Q. You never heard of his going there?

A. I never heard of his going there.

Q. So that your knowledge of his reputation for

peace and quiet is confined to the confines of Clois-

terham ?

A. That is all the place I lived. But of course hewas there, and I knew what his reputation wasthere.

97


Q. In that little community. Well, we will con-

cede that.

(Laughter.)

The Court: Any other questions?

Mr. Bell: I was just thinking,—but that will do,

Mrs. Tope.

(Helena Landless takes the witness stand.)

Mr. Scott: This is an adverse witness, and I

therefore claim, on behalf of the defendant, the

right to cross-examine.

Mr. Bell: I do not think this is an adverse wit-

ness. This little stage play does not signify much.The Court: We will see whether the witness is

adverse or not. Proceed with the examination.

Mr. Bell: Do not prejudge the matter, counselor.

By Mr. Scott:

Q. What is your relation to Neville Landless?

A. I am his twin sister.

Q. Miss Landless, did you have an interview with

your brother immediately preceding the dinner at

John Jasper's on the Christmas Eve of 1851?A. He called at the Nuns' House on the way to

the dinner.

Q. Was he armed with a heavy walking staff

made of iron-wood?A. He had a cane, which he said he intended to

use on a walking trip the next day.

Mr. Bell: Don't be alarmed, young lady. No-body will hurt you.

(Laughter.)

Q. Did he express to you his reluctance in going

to the dinner at Jasper's house to there meet his

enemy, Drood?Mr. Bell: That is objected to.

The Court: The objection is overruled. Thewitness will proceed.

98

DEFENSE—HELENA LANDLESS

A. He spoke of his reluctance to go to the dinner,

and said he wished he were not going; that he did

not like to do it.

Q. Did you watch your brother as he went downto the entrance of the gate-house?

A. I stood at the Nuns' House and watched him.

He walked down to the entrance of the gate-house.

He passed it several times. Finally he turned

rapidly, and went in.

Q. Miss Landless, do you remember the conversa-

tion between your brother and Mr. Crisparkle onthe banks of the river at Cloisterham?

A. I do.

Q. Did not Mr. Crisparkle say that your brother

was in the wrong, and the assailant of EdwinDrood at Jasper's house, the night of your arrival

at Cloisterham?A. He did, but Neville was provoked.

Q. Didn't your brother Neville, refuse to makeamends to Edwin?

A. Yes; but isn't there a difference between sub-

mission to a generous spirit, and submission to a

base and trivial one?Q. Didn't your brother clench his fists when he

refused to make these concessions?

Mr. Bell: Gently leading, I suggest, your Honor.

Mr. Scott : This is an adverse witness to us. Theevidence is against her own twin brother.

The Court: The question will be permitted.

Mr. Bell: Will your Honor grant me an excep-

tion?

The Witness: Oh, must I answer?The Court : The Court sympathizes with the em-

barrassment of the witness, but the question is a

proper one.

Mr. Bell : Well, it will be answered.

By Mr. Scott:

Q. Tell the exact words that your brother said.

99


A. He said "The plain trouble is, I am still asangry, when I recall that night, as I was that night."

Q. Didn't your brother, Neville, then confess toCrisparkle that he loved Rosa Bud, and had ill willagainst Drood upon her account?

A. He admired Miss Bud very much.Q. What else did he say?A. He said that he could not bear to see her met

with deceit and indifference.

Q. Go on, what else?

A. That she was being sacrificed in being be-stowed upon Edwin.

Q. What else did he say? Answer the question.What else did he say?Mr. Bell: Oh, put the words in her mouth, if

you want to.

(Laughter.)By Mr. Scott:

Q. Go on, answer the question. Don't pay anyattention to that Attorney-General. Answer thequestion.

A. He said "I love her, and despise and hatehim," but—

Mr. Scott: Cross-examine.

Cross-Examined.By Mr. Bell :

Q. Well, now, young lady, you have not told all

of this conversation, have you?A. No.

Q. Now let me ask you if this was not the vital

wind-up of the conversation : that Canon Crisparklereasoned with your brother, and you reasoned withyour brother, and finally he gave his word of honoras a Christian gentleman that he would meet EdwinDrood half way, and become reconciled, and let

bygones be bygones. Isn't that so?A. He said he was willing to meet him half way.

100

Joseph P. Rogers

as

Mayor Sapsea

DEFENSE—SAPSEA'S TESTIMONY

Q. And didn't Canon Crisparkle say that EdwinDrood should meet him half way, or even morethan half way?

A. Yes ; I believe he did.

Q. So that the wind-up of this interview on the

river, that counsel has indicated you were so averse

to tell, contained, in the finale, an agreement on his

part as a Christian gentleman, giving his solemnpledge that he would meet Edwin Drood and becomereconciled. Isn't that substantially so?

A. It is.

By Mr. Scott :

Q. Just before he went into the gate-house, hestill told you that he admired and loved Rosa Bud,didn't he?

A. Yes; he did.

The Court : Call another witness.

Mr. Scott: I desire now, may it please yourHonor, to call the Commonwealth's witness, MayorSapsea.

Mr. Bell: Oh, pardon me—pardon me. Somepeople have greatness thrust upon them. TheMayor insisted, I mean Mr. Dogberry insisted, onbeing called as the Commonwealth's witness, andwe gratified his vanity.

The Court: The witness will take the stand.

Proceed.

(Mayor Sapsea takes the witness stand.)

By Mr. Scott :

Q. What is your full name?A. Thomas Sapsea.

Q. What is your business?

A. I am something of a literary man, but mybusiness is that of an auctioneer.

(Laughter.)

101


Q. And what is your official position, Mr. Sapsea,

in Cloisterham?A. I have told you that I am doing the town of

Cloisterham, and its people, the honor of being its

Mayor.Q. Mayor, you can scarcely be ignorant of the

fact that you know the world?A. Ignorant? No. I know something of the

world, something of the world, young man. WhileI have not been to foreign countries, foreign coun-

tries have come to me. I put my hand upon a clock,

a French clock, and I at once say "Paris." I maysee a cup and saucer of Chinese make. I then say

"Pekin, Canton, or Nanking." So it is with Japan,

with India. I have picked up a spear of Eskimomake, thereby putting my finger on the North Pole.

(Laughter and applause.)

Q. Mayor Sapsea, what was the testimony before

you when Landless had his hearing, charged with

the disappearance of Edwin Drood?A. The testimony before me was—sitting, as I

was*, as the Magistrate at that time, your Lordship

—that Landless had armed himself with an offensive

weapon, that he had gone to the dinner, and that

night he had arranged and destroyed some of his

papers, and placed his possessions in a hidden sort

of fashion; that when he was arrested there wasblood upon his clothing. And I do not recall any-

thing else of importance.

Q. There was testimony that he had anteriorly

threatened young Drood, was there not?

A. Without doubt.

MR. Bell : Is this an adverse witness ?

The Court: The witness will proceed. This is

an intelligent witness.

By Mr. Scott:

Q. That was all of the testimony before you,

Mayor, wasn't it?

102

DEFENSE—SAPSEA'S TESTIMONY

A. It was, indeed.

Q. Knowing the world, and being a student ofhuman nature, will you state whether you havesince stated your suspicions of this young man,Landless?

A. I have stated that there is more than suspicion—almost certainty, almost certainty. We have notgot the proof, of course, but proof must be built

up, stone by stone, and thus allowing the secrets of

the prison house to escape,—

"the secrets of theprison house," your Lordship, is a term that I usewhen I am upon the bench—I have not the slightest

doubt but that the long arm of the law will reach outand get the murderer. With the iron will of myfriend, Mr. Jasper, pursuing, the long arm andthe strong arm of the law, will reach out and get

him. "The long arm, and the strong arm," is whatis called the investigation of the law.

Q. You discharged young Landless from custody,

after you heard all the testimony, including the

testimony of the finding of the watch and chain,

together with the pin, didn't you?A. I did my duty as an English Magistrate, and

discharged him.

Q. Why did you discharge him?A. I did not deem there was sufficient proof

under the law. No one had seen the lost boy, andthe proof not going beyond a moral certainty, I

therefore discharged him.

Q. Was there any proof before you that Droodhad been killed?

Mr. Bell: I object. It is not in the record. If

there were, we would not be here to-night.

Mr. Scott : The great trouble, may it please yourHonor, is that he has been having some of his assist-

ants in Harrisburg read the record.

Mr. Bell : Qui facit per alium facit per se.

103


MR. Scott: The record states "No discovery beingmade which proved the lost man to be dead, it at

length became necessary to release the person sus-

pected of having made away with him. Neville wasset at large."

The Court : The Court so recollects what is said

in the book, and the witness can so testify.

(Question read as follows: "Was there any proof

before you that Drood had been killed?")

Mr. Bell: I object to it. It is not in the record.

The Court : Proceed with the answer.

Mr. Bell : I object to such a question, that such aquestion is not in the record.

Mr. Scott : Don't let the pealing of a "Bell" dis-

turb you.

The Court: Proceed.

Mr. Bell: I insist upon a ruling, and that this

witness shall not go "Scott" free in all of his an-

swers.

The Court: The objection is overruled, and the

witness will proceed.

By Mr. Scott:

Q. Proceed with your answer, Mr. Sapsea, Mayor.A. There was no proof of the death of Edwin

Drood before me.

Q. You know John Jasper, don't you?A. I know him very well indeed.

Q. How long have you known him?A. Oh, for a great many years.

Q. Are you particularly well acquainted with Mr.

Jasper?A. Very well acquainted with him. In fact Mr.

Jasper is one of my admirers. I might add, amongmy other admirers, Mr. Jasper was one of the first,

I believe, to recognize the merits of a slight literary

effort on my part in behalf of the late Mrs. Sapsea.

104


Q. What is Mr. Jasper's reputation for peace andquiet?

A. It is unspotted and flawless—flawless indeed.

Mr. Scott: You may cross-examine. I might say,

Mr. Attorney-General, that at times even a Dogberrybites.

Mr. Bell: I am always wary of Greeks bearinggifts.

cross-examined.By Mr. Bell:

Q. May I ask if you, in your intimate acquaint-ance with Mr. Jasper, ever went on some jaunts, andopium debauches, down to London town ?

A. Never beyond a few bottles of port wine,—in

my own house, always.

Q. So that this wide knowledge of the world that

you had, so far as Jasper is concerned, is within theconfines of your mayoralty?

A. Within the confines of the ancient town of

Cloisterham.

Q. Are you related to Hoch Der Kaiser, or Theo-dore the First?

(Laughter.)

A. No ; but I strongly suspect that somewhere at

the counsel table is a relative of Villa's.*

Q. Are you intentionally guilty of an anachronism,or inadvertently so?

A. As you choose to take it.

Q. You speak of this literary talent you have,

about the versatility of talent you possess. Willyou kindly read to the jury this gem of literary

merit that you refer to?

A. Regarding the late Mrs. Sapsea?Q. Regarding the late Mrs. Sapsea.A. With pleasure.

*Villa, at the date of the trial, was at the head of an insur-rection in Mexico, and there was rumor of war between himand the United States.

105


Q. I wish them to know what a literary pen youhave.

A. With pleasure. "Ethelinda, reverential wife

of Mr. Thomas Sapsea, auctioneer, valuer, estate

agent, etc., of this City, whose knowledge of the

world though somewhat extensive, never broughthim acquainted with a spirit more capable of look-

ing up to him. Stranger, pause, and ask thyself the

question, canst thou do likewise? If not, with a

blush retire."

Q. Is it not true that the prisoner here extolled

the par excellence of this literary effort of yours?

A. He admired it at once, upon his hearing myreading of it.

Q. Did you lend to the rhyme of the poem the

music of your voice also?

A. I allowed it to have all that it was entitled to

under the circumstancs.

Q. Now just one question more. I want to know—I ask you if you recall, Mr. Mayor, what quadrupedin the animal kingdom you and Dogberry typify?

A. I answer that we are almost in the same stable.

Q. Now I want to ask you, for it seems an affront

to your dignity—treason, lese-majeste

—

The Court: Proceed.

By Mr. Bell :

Q. Why did you not expunge from the record this

part of it. "Accepting the jackass as the type of

self-sufficient stupidity and conceit—a custom per-

haps, like some few other customs, more conven-

tional than fair, then the purest jackass in Cloister-

ham is Mr. Thomas Sapsea, auctioneer." Why did

you not expunge that from the record?

A. Well, Mr. Attorney-General, if that refers to

me, it was written about me because you were not

then living in Cloisterham.

(Laughter and applause.)

106

The Trial Scene

DEFENSE—JASPER'S TESTIMONY

(John Jasper takes the witness stand.)

By Mr. Scott:Q. You are the defendant, aren't you?A. I am.

Mr. Scott: Keep your voice up, so the jury canhear you, Mr. Jasper.

By Mr. Scott:Q. What is your name?A. John Jasper.

Q. Where do you live?

A. Cloisterham. I have rooms with the verger,

Mr. Tope.

Q. What is your profession?

A. I am the choir master and organist of Cloister-

ham Cathedral.

Q. And your age is what?A. 27 years.

Q. How long have you lived at Cloisterham?A. About ten years.

Q. What was your relationship to Edwin Drood?A. I was his uncle.

Q. Mr. Jasper, you are charged with the murderof your nephew. Did you murder him?

A. I did not.

Q. When did you last see your nephew, EdwinDrood?

A. I last saw my nephew, Edwin Drood, onChristmas Eve., about 12 o'clock.

Q. Keep your voice up, Mr. Jasper, so that the

gentlemen at the end of the jury can hear you.

The Court: The Court will ask the witness to

speak in a distinct tone of voice, so that he may beheard.

By Mr. Scott:Q. What hour of the night, on this Christmas

Eve, did you last see your nephew?A. Twelve o'clock.

107


Q. Will you tell the jury in your own way of theoccasion of your seeing Edwin Drood on this Christ-mas Eve?

A. I had arranged a party of reconciliation be-tween my nephew, Edwin Drood, and Neville Land-less. Sometime prior to that the boys had had amisunderstanding, and I arranged this little dinnerto bring them together. They met there that night,and about twelve o'clock they left my rooms to goto view the effect of the storm on the river, a stormhaving arisen about eleven o'clock. That is the last

I saw of him.

Q. What did you next do?A. The next morning I rushed over to Canon

Crisparkle's home, and on my way there I observeda crowd standing around the Cathedral tower. Thehands of the clock had been torn off. The lead ofthe roof had been rolled up and thrown to theground, and some of the stones had been broken off.

I saw Canon Crisparkle standing at his window, andI rushed up and I said "Where is my nephew?" Hesaid "He is not here. He is not with me." I said

"He is not? He left about midnight last night withNeville Landless, and has not returned." He said

"Neville left early this morning." I said "Let mein; let me in."

Q. What was done with reference to Neville

Landless ?

A. A posse was organized, of which I was one,

and we followed the route taken by Neville Landless.

Q. And he was apprehended and brought on be-

fore Mayor Sapsea as the Mayor, as related here in

the court room. Isn't that so?

A. He was.

Q. After Landless was paroled in the custody of

his teacher, what did you then do?A. I spent two days and two nights searching the

river banks, but I could find no tidings of my boy.

108

DEFENSE—JASPER'S TESTIMONY

Q. You remember the evening of December 27th,

1851?A. I do.

Q. Whom did you meet that evening?

A. I had returned to my home, exhausted frommy search, without food, without rest, and Mr.Grewgious called to see me.

Q. What did Mr. Grewgious say to you? Whatdid you say to him?

A. Mr. Grewgious entered my apartments, andhe said to me "This is strange news." I said "It is"

—referring to the disappearance. He said "I havenews for you that will surprise you." He said "Willyou hear it now?" I said "Tell it to me." He told

me then that he had called to tell me that EdwinDrood and Rosa Bud had broken off their engage-ment.

Q. What then happened, as far as you remember?A. As I had built up my hopes in connection with

my nephew and Rosa Bud, in my weakened condi-

tion I fell to the floor in a swoon.

Q. When you regained consciousness from that

swoon, what did you then say?

A. I told him that I had some crumbs of comfortfrom the story which he told me. I told him that

I thought probably the disappearance of EdwinDrood was explained by the fact that he probablydid not care to remain in Cloisterham to answer thequestioning tongues of the townspeople concerningthe broken engagement.

Q. While you were relating that, who else cameinto your room?

A. Canon Crisparkle.

Q. What did Canon Crisparkle say in reference to

your view?A. I had expressed the same theory in his pres-

ence, and he said "I trust that may be true."

109


Q. What did you then do?A. Following that, I spent all my time in en-

deavoring to weave around the one man I supposedto be guilty of the murder of my nephew—to weavearound him the net, and I followed him to London.I followed Neville Landless to London and spied

upon him, and watched him, although I never sawhim come out of his quarters until night, only at

night.

Q. Mr. Jasper, you stated that this ChristmasEve dinner with Edwin and Neville was for the

purpose of establishing a friendly relation betweenthe two young men. Had there been a quarrel be-

tween them?A. There had.

Q. When?A. Sometime prior to that, the day that Neville

Landless and his sister arrived in Cloisterham, a

party was given, or rather a dinner was given bythat good man, Canon Crisparkle, at his home.They were there. Neville Landless, and his sister,

Rosa Bud, and Edwin and myself. And in the even-

ing the boys went home with Helena

—

Q. Don't talk so fast, and keep your voice up so

that the jury can hear the whole of your story.

Throw your voice out so that those at the end of

the court room may hear.

Mr. Bell: Remember, he is undergoing a strain.

By Mr. Scott :

Q. Proceed.

A. The two boys saw Rosa Bud and Helena homefrom the house. Meantime I had been out for astroll. As I came home I heard words. I stepped

across the street and heard Neville Landless say,

"In the part of the world I come from, you wouldbe called to account for this." I stepped in betweenthe boys, and I insisted upon them becoming goodfriends, and invited them to my quarters. While

110

DEFENSE-JASPER'S TESTIMONY

they were there I brewed, or rather I mulled, aglass of wine for them, and during the course of

the evening they fell to discussing things. Recrimi-

nation followed recrimination, until as a result of

their quarrel Neville Landless drew back with his

glass, and dashed the contents of his glass in the

face of Edwin Drood, and if it had not been that I

was there at that time to protect him, he would havethrown the glass after it. He struggled to breakaway from me, and dashed the glass on the hearth-

stone, and rushed from my quarters.

Q. This mulled wine that you gave to Edwin andto Neville, did you mull it at your open fireplace

before the two young men?A. I did.

Q. Did you fill the glass of both young men andalso your own glass, from the common vessel?

A. I did; in their presence.

Q. What did you do with the wine that you filled

in your own glass?

A. I drank it.

Q. In their presence?

A. In their presence.

Q. When Neville Landless came to your home to

have this meal on Christmas Eve, did you notice

whether or not he carried a heavy walking stick of

iron wood?A. I noticed that he had such a stick with him.

Q. When you saw him apprehended the next day,

eight miles from Cloisterham, was he still armedwith that stick?

A. He was, and I called the attention of those

who were around that there were blood spots uponthe stick, and there were blood spots upon his

clothes.

Ill


cross-examined.By Mr. Bell:

Q. Now don't you know that those blood spots

upon his clothes were duplicated by blood spots

upon the clothes of one of the fellow townsmen withwhom he had an encounter when he resisted arrest?

A. So he said.

Q. And didn't the crowd accept that verdict?

A. They believed what he said.

Q. And he pointed to his opponent, who had theidentical blood upon his person?

A. He had blood on his person.

Q. In your presence?A. Yes.

Q. Why do you seek to create an impression to

the contrary?A. I at that time did not know.Q. I mean here before this jury?A. I told you what I saw at that time.

Q. All right. Now you have explained it.

The Court: The witness can explain in his ownlanguage.

Mr. Bell : I will give him time to explain.

The Witness : What do you wish me to explain ?

Mr. Bell : You have given the explanation. Thatis enough, sir.

By Mr. Bell :

Q. Your vocation is that of an organist and choir

master, and lay precentor in this cathedral?

A. Yes.

Q. But ever and anon, between sacred services,

you go down to see Princess Puffer, and go on anopium debauch?

A. I have gone down there to indulge in my habit

of smoking opium. That I admit.

Q. And the good townspeople in Cloisterham,

from the stupid Mayor down, did not know any-

thing about it, did they?

112

John P. Colghlixas

John Jasper


A. No, and I was very anxious that they should

not.

Q. You made the acquaintance of one Durdles upat Cloisterham?

A. I did.

Q. I suppose he was one of your intellectual

equals, wasn't he?A. He was not.

Q. And yet you were very chivalric with him,

weren't you?A. I was.

Q. You wanted to carry his bundle home for him ?

A. I had conceived the desire or intention of writ-

ing a book, if I were capable of so doing, concerning

Cloisterham and its people, and I wanted to get local

atmosphere, and I selected my friend Durdles as

being a character, and therefore I effected his ac-

quaintance.

Q. So in order to get local atmosphere you car-

ried his bundle home that contained the key to the

Sapsea vault, hey?A. To when do you refer? What time?

Q. You know the night to which I refer?

A. From Sapsea's?

Q. No. When he was standing up against the

iron rails of the cemetery. That is the night.

A. That was after the Sapsea visit?

Q. Yes, the same night. You had tried to get the

bundle at Sapsea's?

A. I weighed the keys in my hand.

Q. Were you trying to get local atmosphere upthere, too?

A. I was ; and I got it, too.

Q. What was it—a drink?A. No. Conceit, from my friend, Mayor Sapsea,

and reality, from Durdles.

Q. Were you trying to get local atmosphere whenyou and Durdles stood behind the wall, seeing Canon

113


Crisparkle and Neville Landless going by, andstooped down so that they would not see you? Wasthat local atmosphere?

A. It was. I got the local atmosphere of a goodkindly man in the futile attempt of taming a tiger-

ish disposition. It was so futile that it was ludi-

crous to me, and I laughed.

Q. Why did you hide behind the wall when theywent by? In order to get the local atmosphere?

A. Because I wanted to be alone with Durdles,

and hear his own story.

Q. You did not want them to know that you weregoing to take this midnight expedition down in thecrypt, did you?

A. They had heard of it.

Q. You did not want them to know you weregoing down that night in the crypt?

A. They had heard of it.

Q. You went down clandestinely?

A. Not necessarily. It was mentioned before

Sapsea, the Dean, and Tope.

Q. Then why did you hide behind this wall?

A. As I explained, as I said, we did not want anyinterruptions. We wanted to go down there alone,

without being detained.

Q. Then you did not want them to know you weregoing down that night?

A. I did not want to be detained.

Q. You went down at midnight?

A. We did.

Q. Why did you take along this wicker bottle filled

with liquor?

A. The nearest road to Durdles' affections was bythe liquor route.

Q. So you bought this liquor to give to Durdles—you, a member of the Church?

114


A. You have heard what Durdles has said aboutbringing enough for twice two, and being twice wel-

come.

Q. You, a Churchman, provided yourself with abottle of liquor, and you went down on this mid-night expedition into the crypt with Durdles?

A. I did.

Q. Of course he passed away?A. He became intoxicated, it is true.

Q. Was it your idea of getting local atmosphereto spend two hours down in the crypt, alone, whileDurdles, from whom you expected to get it, lay in adrunken stupor, the result of your having given himliquor?

A. He was kind enough to bring me there, and I

would not go away without him.

Q. So you gave him the liquor, and he gave youthe bundle with the key in it?

A. What key?

Q. I asked you, the key?A. There were two keys. Which key?

Q. Were there two keys in the bundle?A. I don't recall seeing them.

Q. You were intensely interested in a key in the

bundle?A. There were two keys. To which key do you

refer?

Q. I refer to the key in the bundle, the key in thebundle at Mayor Sapsea's; the key in the bundlewhen you chivalrously escorted him home?

A. What key was it, and I will tell you? Therewere two keys that night.

Q. What did you get in the bundle that youwanted to get?

A. I didn't see a key in the bundle.

The Court: The witness has a right to answerin his own way.

115


The Witness: If he will tell me which key heis referring to ; I don't think he knows.

Mr. Bell: It is immaterial.

By Mr. Bell:

Q. There was a key in the bundle, wasn't there?A. I didn't see a key in the bundle.

Q. Didn't you see him put a key in the bundle upat Mayor Sapsea's?

A. That was several days before. That was thekey of the Sapsea monument.

Q. Yes.

A. The keys that he used—I will tell you for yourinformation, that which he used that night was thekey which admitted us to the crypt; and the otherkey—after we ascended the stone steps through thecrypt up to the chancel hall, there was a door lead-

ing up into the tower. He had two keys, and if youwill tell me which key you are referring to, I will

try to explain it to you.

Q. You just took the whole three keys, andsounded them in a musical way?

A. There were but two that night.

Q. Up at Sapsea's weren't there three?A. There were. Being a musician I was anxious

to strike the chord.

Q. I think we have got enough local atmospherein a midnight expedition. Tell me why—when youcame out—when you came out why did you grabthe boy by the throat in a demoniacal rage, andthreaten to strangle him because he happened to beon the watch?

A. That was not the first time I had met thatboy.

Q. You did threaten to strangle him then?A. I did attempt to strangle him that night.

Q. You were in love with Rosa Bud, weren't you?A. I was.

116


Q. Madly in love with her?A. Passionately.

Q. Do you remember that interview you had withher in the nun's garden?

A. I recall it very distinctly; yes.

Q. Didn't you say to her there, referring to

Neville Landless, that he was in direct peril, and,

"Judge for yourself," you said to her, "whetheranother admirer can love you and live?"

A. Referring to him. I meant that, and I meantit thoroughly, as I regarded him as the murderer of

my dead nephew.

Mr. Scott: That question is objected to.

By Mr. Bell :

Q. Didn't you refer to Edwin Drood

Mr. Scott: That is objected to.

By Mr. Bell:Q. Didn't you say, sir, having reference to Edwin

Drood, whom you are charged with murdering here,

that had the ties which bound you to him been onesilken thread less than what they were, you wouldhave swept even him out of existence, because of

your mad love for her?A. I did say that, and I also said that while I

thought she was his, and while I thought that hehad her love, that I proved loyal to him and to her,

and I never would utter one word of love to heruntil after the engagement had been broken six

months.Q. But she told you at that interview that you

told her that you loved her madly, all the time he wasalive. Didn't you?

A. I did.

Q. And she knew it as a result of your hypnoticglances. Didn't she tell you so?

A. I have no hypnotic influence over her, or overany other person.

117


Q. Well, you kept a diary, didn't you?A. It is in evidence.

Q. You make entries in that diary, don't you?A. They are in evidence.

Q. And didn't you, after the watch and pin werefound in the river—by the way, you suggested to

Mayor Sapsea that the river be searched?

A. He was the one to attend to that.

Q. But you said you understood him to say so,

when you, in fact, said so?

A. The suggestion came from me. It was aproper thing to do under the circumstances.

Q. Why did you put it into his mouth?A. Because he probably overlooked his duty at

that time.

Q. After the watch and pin were found, you wrotein your diary, "My dear boy is murdered," didn't

you?A. I did.

Q. And you wrote that you threw to the winds—you scouted all suggestion that he had disappeared?

A. Yes; I did.

Q. That any thought of that kind perished beforethe fatal discovery of the watch and pin up therein the weir by the river—didn't you?

A. I did.

Q. And you went into mourning for your nephew?A. I did.

Q. And you, from that time on, have invariably

referred to him as murdered, haven't you?A. I have.

Q. Now you want this jury to think that he is not,

do you?A. No.

The Court: Are there any more witnesses?

MR. Scott: That is the defence, your Honor.

118

Two of the Veniremen

Wm, T. Tilden A. G. Hetherington

DEFENSE—CLOSING SPEECH OF COUNSEL

The Court: Gentlemen of the jury: counsel for

the prosecution have very magnanimously agreed to

shorten the program. The Attorney-General, whohad prepared to sum up in a masterly way to the

jury, has agreed to waive his right to do so.

The attorney, however, for the defence, has not

yet appeared in the trial. It is agreed that he shall

have ten minutes talk to the jury, after which there

will be a recess of five minutes, and then the Courtwill charge the jury.

Counsel for the defence will now proceed to the

jury.

Mr. Scott : May it please your Honor.Gentlemen of the jury: This defendant is pre-

sumed to be innocent. Beforeyou may find him guilty

you must have evidence not only sufficient to over-

come this presumption of innocence, but to convince

you of the defendant's guilt beyond every reasonable

doubt. The burden of presenting such evidence is

upon the Commonwealth.The Commonwealth must prove

—

First: that Edwin Drood was murdered.Second : that he was murdered by John Jasper.

Has this been accomplished by the Common-wealth's testimony?What is the evidence of John Jasper's guilt? No

mortal claims to have seen the defendant murderhis nephew.

Its highest offer is a tissue of straggling, uncon-vincing circumstances which it claims point to his

guilt.

It is claimed that his love for Rosa Bud is the mo-tive ; it is claimed that the knowledge of and visit to

the crypt and tower were preparations for the crime

;

it is claimed that the drunken mutterings of this de-

fendant at Princess Puffer's den were admissions of

guilt; but how flimsy is such evidence. And howquickly it disappears upon the slightest scrutiny!

119


The love of Jasper for Rosa Bud was concealed in his

heart as sacredly and secretly as the love of Grew-gious for the drowned mother of his ward. And this

secret love of Jasper for Rosa Bud was accompaniedby his open, expressed love and affection for his

nephew, the betrothed of Rosa Bud. Nor was this

love for Rosa Bud voiced until six months after the

broken engagement and the disappearance of Edwin.

Can this affection for the girl who was soon to

marry his nephew be called motive actuating the

destruction of his own nephew? If the defendant's

love for Rosa Bud, concealed and sacred as it was,

is a motive for this crime, how do you dispose of

the defendant's great love, affection and tenderness

for the nephew of whose murder he is charged?How do you dispose of the testimony of honest Mrs.

Tope, who tells you her sincere story of this affec-

tion?

What evidence of the defendant's guilt is given

to you by the poor, drunken Durdles in his besotted

story? He met Jasper at the home of Mayor Sapsea

and there obtained the keys to the Sapsea tomb ; he

tells you that these keys were weighed by Jasper,

but at the suggestion of Durdles, himself ; that later

in the evening Jasper proffered his kind offices to

accompany the poor drunkard to his home and to

carry his bundle, which Durdles was almost in-

capable of carrying. Is the accusation of the guilt

of this defendant strengthened at all by this portion

of Durdles' story? And, again, when Durdles tells

you that on Monday night before Christmas Eve, as

previously arranged, Jasper came to his hovel for the

purpose of visiting the crypt and tower of the

Cathedral, does he give you any evidence against

this defendant?

The prosecuting attorney makes much of the fact

that on this visit Jasper carries with him a wicker

bottle of liquor for Durdles ; but he forgets Durdles'

120


story "that anyone was welcome to call at his homewho brought liquor for two, or if he likes to makeit twice two, he will be twice as welcome." And he

makes much of the fact that Durdles and Jasper left

the crypt, going to the top of the tower and while

on the trip Durdles carries the rum, and Jasper

—

Durdles' ever present dinner bundle. But he forgets

that there was no evidence that the bundle on that

night contained the key to Sapsea's or any other

tomb.

Does the testimony of Durdles, that he and Jasper

concealed themselves by the wall when Crisparkel

and Neville Landless passed, and that Jasper laughed

at the poor, innocent Crisparkel and the savage

young tiger from Ceylon whom he sought to tame,

point to this defendant's guilt? He ignores the fact

that Jasper ever sought retirement from compan-ions, that he was a man who led a solitary, melan-

choly life. The prosecuting attorney points to Dur-dles' characterization of Jasper's angry expression

towards Landless, as an indication of this defend-

ant's guilt ; but he forgets the cause of that enmity—that but a short time before this same young manhad attempted to cut down the beloved nephew of

Jasper. What would the Commonwealth ask youmen to draw from Durdles' testimony? Surely there

is no significance in Jasper's desire to go to the top

of the tower, or in paying his guide, Durdles, withthe price that appealed to him most, a bottle of

liquor. Surely no guilt can be inferred from Dur-dles' drunken dream in the crypt, because he tells

you, himself, that the Christmas Eve before in that

same crypt his drunken dream was "a ghost of a

shriek and the ghost of a howl of a dog."

The Commonwealth then resorts to its pitiful

attempt to prove the defendant's guilt by the worth-

less testimony of an opium hag—a poor, drunkensot who tells you that for sixteen years she was a

121


drunkard making her living by selling opium to

"Chinamen, Lascars and Knifers." Who resorts to

begging and has shown her willingness to add black-

mail to her nefarious callings. They would attempt

by her testimony to raise the mutterings of this

benumbed defendant while under the influence of

opium so willingly supplied by her hands, to admis-

sion of guilt. But with all this, what does this poor

creature tell you? Nothing more than that the de-

fendant smoking opium in her den referred to a

journey that he had often taken in his fancy, andthen she depicts his actions and tells of his inco-

herent mumblings while completely under the in-

fluence of the drug.

The Commonwealth would ask that you give to

the story of this wicked, worthless hag, this drunk-ard, this opium smoker, this associate of Chinamenand cut-throats, the credence of verity. What vio-

lence to the common-sense of intelligent men, is this?

Nor can the testimony of Grewgious persuade

your mind of the guilt of this defendant ; rather does

it establish more convincingly his innocence; moredoes it remove the Commonwealth's argument of

motive. Grewgious pictures to you the scene of the

defendant's collapse on the evening two days after

Edwin's disappearance. The Commonwealth con-

tends that the collapse of the defendant following

the sudden information by Grewgious of the brokenengagement of Edwin and Rosa Bud, points to his

guilt. Does it not rather eloquently picture Jasper's

great love for Edwin ; does not his collapse after his

days of exhausting search better portray the blasted

hope for his beloved nephew's happiness?

This is the Commonwealth's whole story against

John Jasper. Is there any portion of it that points

to the guilt of the defendant?

But we have another towards whom the finger of

suspicion points—Neville Landless, whose own lips

122


said "I love Rosa Bud and I hate and despise EdwinDrood."

If there was motive on Jasper's part of secret

love for Rosa Bud what more was the motive for

this wild young tiger from Ceylon who had lived a

life unrestrained, inflamed with infatuation for

Rosa Bud, impulsed by his hatred for Drood—

a

hatred bred of insult by Drood, and his champion-ship of the lady herself. Who is this Neville Land-less? By his own words, "Of such tigerish blood

that he would have struck Drood down on the dayof their first meeting had this defendant not re-

strained him." From his own tongue, "One whowould have murdered his stepfather had not natural

death prevented." But we find even more—not only

his murderous disposition, but also we find him the

last person in whose presence is seen Edwin Drood.

Who but Landless testifies to the return of Droodfrom the trip to the river?

But more: the next day after the disappearance

of Drood the citizens of Cloisterham pursued Land-less and he is not overpowered until he is stricken

down and has struck down with his heavy iron woodstick at least one of his captors. Surely, here lies

suspicion: motive, openly expressed; opportunity

clearly shown. And more—we find that it is towardsNeville Landless that the finger of suspicion is

pointed and the good people of Cloisterham shunand condemn him. The good Dean of the Cathedral

directs Crisparkel to dismiss him from his home.

How can you, jurymen, say by your verdict that

the finger of guilt points towards John Jasper morethan toward Neville Landless?

Upon the part of this defendant the testimony

shows Jasper's love for Edwin Drood; of Neville

Landless it shows his hate for Edwin Drood.

On the part of John Jasper the testimony showshis love for Rosa Bud sacredly concealed in his

123


breast; not disclosed until six months after thebreaking of the engagement and the disappearanceof Edwin Drood. Of Neville Landless it shows his

love for Rosa Bud, monstrous, openly declared to

Crisparkel and to Helena, his sister, in the words,"Husband or no husband, that fellow is unworthyof her. I love Rosa Bud and I hate and despisehim."

On the part of the defendant, John Jasper, thereis shown no opportunity to have murdered EdwinDrood on Christmas Eve. Of Neville Landless thetestimony shows that it was in his company EdwinDrood was last seen ; that Landless was armed witha stick that might well have laid Edwin low.

Of Jasper, we find from the testimony that hewas of a quiet, melancholy, retiring disposition,

given to the habit of opium smoking. Of Neville

Landless the testimony tells us he is of tigerish

blood, of unrestrained temper, of violent, murderous,disposition.

Does the Commonwealth claim that the guilt ofJohn Jasper has been proved by the finding of thewatch and chain and pin? Surely there can be nosuch contention because we find from the evidencethat twenty minutes after two o'clock on the 24thday of December this watch was wound by the local

jeweler. When the watch was found on the 28thday of December in the timber of the weir byCrisparkel the watch had run down and had notbeen wound. Does this give to the Commonwealththe right to contend that Jasper placed this watchand pin where found?

Gentlemen of the Jury, is it not a significant fact

that we find Neville Landless roaming along thebanks of the river in the neighborhood of the weirafter his parole by Mayor Sapsea and before thediscovery of the jewelry by Crisparkel? Is thereany more evidence against Jasper as to the placing

124


of them, than against Landless? Was there any-

more opportunity to Jasper than to Landless?

Has the Commonwealth even proved that there

was a murder of Edwin Drood? Where is the

proof? Where was he murdered and how? Doesthe Commonwealth charge he was decoyed to andthrown from the top of the tower? Does the dis-

placement of the stone and the lead of the towertop and the removal of the hands of the tower clock

explain Drood's fall from its height? If so, whereis the evidence at the bottom of the tower? Whereare the blood stains? Do they not forget the fearful

storm of the night hours "that tore through the

streets of Cloisterham. No such power of wind hadblown for many a winter night; chimneys toppled

to the street and large branches torn from the trees

crashed to the earth." Do they forget this or de-

liberately ignore it?

Or does the Commonwealth claim that Jasper gar-

rotted Drood with the scarf with which the singer

protected his throat from the dampness of the

Cathedral and that the body was concealed in the

Sapsea tomb, buried in the quicklime from Durdles'

yard. If this is the Commonwealth's contention,

where is the proof of this unholy use of his protect-

ing scarf? Where is the proof that the lime whichwas seen unprotected a week before, retained its de-

structive properties until this Christmas Eve? Forthe Commonwealth to establish the retention of this

strength it would have to controvert the very laws

of nature. If this is their contention why the ab-

sence of Durdles' testimony to prove the disappear-

ance of the quicklime? Why the absence of the tes-

timony to prove the disturbance of the tomb? If

there is evidence of this fact, the Commonwealthmust have it at its hands ; the key to Sapsea's monu-ment is in the possession of their witness, Durdles.

Does the Commonwealth contend that the body

125


was disposed of in the river? The search of manydays has failed to aid this contention.

The failure of the Commonwealth to prove

Drood's murder seemed so apparent that even the

committing- Magistrate, Mayor Sapsea, said, in

dismissing the inquiry of Drood's disappearance,

"Nothing more being found and no discovery being

made which proved the lost man to be dead, it wasnecessary to dismiss the person suspected."

We, therefore, respectfully submit to the jury

that the Commonwealth has failed to prove the twoessential elements in this case:

First—That Edwin Drood was murdered.

Second—That he was murdered by John Jasper,

and the defendant should therefore be found "NOTGUILTY."

Mr. Bell: * Gentlemen of the jury: I daresay I

may give proper expression to your feelings in the

oft-repeated saying of that royal murderer

—

"If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well

it were done quickly."

When Billy Sunday, the evangelist, addressed the

University students the other day (pardon the

anachronism) his text was: "Be strong and prove

yourself a man." Even so, do not let any molly-

coddle misgivings or doctrinaire doubts sweep you

from your mental moorings in this case.

I submit I have proved everything I have prom-

ised in my opening address. First, then, let us con-

sider the hypocritical, infamous, murderous char-

acter of this defendant, that you may conclude he

would not hesitate to commit the crime of murder

*Due to the lateness of the hour, Mr. Bell graciously

agreed to omit his closing speech. Owing to the excellence

of the address, the Editor deems it fitting to publish the same.

126

SUMMING UP OF PROSECUTION

with which he is charged. It has been vainly sought

to prove his good character in aid of the defense of

reasonable doubt. But what does the good CanonCrisparkel, or that monument of stupidity and con-

ceit—Mayor Sapsea, or the simple Mrs. Tope or

any of the other sweet souls who are cloistered in

Cloisterham, know about the other side of the lan-

tern—about the doings in the opium joints of East

London? There is a difference between reputation

and character. It may be conceded that the pris-

oner's reputation within the narrow precincts of

Cloisterham was good; but the fact is conclusively

established that his character was hypocritical, in-

famous and murderous. An organist, leader of the

choir in the old Cathedral, his vocation was to direct

the thoughts, the hopes, the hearts, the prayers of

sinners to high Heaven. But, arch-hypocrite that

he was, between the sacred services, he betook him-

self incog, to Princess Puffer's den of iniquity, fre-

quented by low characters, where he indulged in

opiate debauches and gave vent to murderous mut-terings and threats against his nephew. Demon-stratively professing for that nephew the tenderest

affection, he nevertheless made fiendish love to his

fiancee, enslaving her with his Svengali-like looks,

and forbidding her to disclose his hellish affection

to Edwin. That this love was mad and murderousis established by her unimpeached testimony, for

you will recall what she told you of that scene in

the garden—how, in a mephistophelian monotone,

with imperturbable countenance, he avowed over

and over again that he loved her madly, and that

no other admirer could love her and live ; aye, more,

that had the ties which bound him to his dear boy

been one silken thread less, he would have swept

"even him" out of human existence because of his

mad love for her. Gentlemen, it is clear beyond a

doubt that John Jasper's heart was as black as

127


pitch—his instincts bestial, fiendish, and that hewas a character of Hell. Away, then, with all sug-gestion that this man's character should weigh in

the balance of reasonable doubt.

What I have said to you indicates the motive thatactuated the crime—mad, murderous love for Rosa—fiendish jealousy of his innocent, unsuspectingand loving nephew. Love, at once the inspiration

and the desperation of the world, what crimes arecommitted in thy name! It has been so in all agesand among all peoples. Achilles liked to have sacri-

ficed Greece and her glory for a female captive.

Mark Antony nearly lost a world for the dark-eyed sorceress of the Nile. Mirabeau almost bar-

tered his love of country for the love of a Queen.Charles the Second's dying words were : "Don't let

poor Nellie starve." So, too, his name enshrinedin the motto—"England expects every man to dohis duty," even Lord Nelson petitioned the Nationto pension his "Lady Hamilton." Crimes against

self and family and country are these! Witnessfurther the reign of Henry VIII, with its murderouscrimes against the Church and Heaven.A patriotic modesty moves me to refrain from

mentioning Alexander Hamilton's amours, or OldHickory's infatuation for the bar maid. Love, then,

gentlemen—murderous love—such was the motiveof John Jasper.

And now, bearing in mind his hellish character

and his murderous motive, let us pass to the incrimi-

nating circumstantial evidence which convicts him,

to a moral certainty, of this crime. And here, let

me again remind you that our present great ChiefJustice Gibson has declared that such circumstantial

evidence in the concrete may be infinitely stronger

than positive testimony. And so it is in this case.

Let us then examine this evidence in the concrete,

item by item, and ask yourself, in each instance,

128


this pointed inquiry: Is this item of evidence con-

sistent with innocence? Is it explicable upon the

theory of innocence? If it is not, and leads, step

by step, to the conclusion of guilt, then, gentlemen,

your duty lies plainly before you. I ask you, then,

is it consistent with innocence that John Jaspershould endeavor mal-adroitly, to get from Durdlesthe keys to the crypts and the Sapsea vault; that

this churchman should have induced Durdles to take

him clandestinely into the crypt at midnight, andthen have stupefied Durdles with drink, enabling

Jasper to spend several hours there in undisturbed

exploration ; that upon emerging and finding Deputyon the watch, he should, in demoniacal rage, almost

have strangled the boy? That under the pretense

of acting as a peacemaker, he should have given

drugged wine to Edwin and Neville and fanned the

flame of their quarrel into a white heat, and then

declared that young Landless' conduct was mur-derous.

Is it consistent with innocence that Jasper should

have waited from twelve o'clock midnight until the

next morning, and then have burst, pale, half-nakedand panting, upon the crowd, demanding to knowwhere his nephew was; that he should have madeno inquiry during the raging storm between mid-night and morning if he were so exercised by his

dear boy's absence; that he should have falsely putthe words suggesting the searching of the river andits banks, into the mouth of Mayor Sapsea? Whothrew the watch and pin, found by Mr. Crisparkel,

into the river? Why did John Jasper make this

suggestion, and why did he make it in this disin-

genuous and insidious way?And now let us turn to the incident of December

23rd under the Cathedral elms, as Edwin and Rosabade each other an affectionate farewell. Why wasJohn Jasper there, peering, spying at them under

129


the trees as they kissed each other good-bye? Andwhy did he covertly follow them to the gatehouse?Why was Rosa Bud so perturbed? And here, let

us pause for a moment, that you may consider RosaBud's condemnation of John Jasper. Why did she

accuse him, in the garden scene, of being a bad,

bad man, disloyal and false to Eddy? Why did she

suspect Jasper of this crime before anyone else?

Ah, it was her instinct! There is nothing like awoman's instinct ! She may know little of the rules

of logic ; she may lack, as Kipling says, the qualities

that make for abstract justice; but no one will denythat her instinct is "deadlier than the male." Shejumps right to the conclusion, and her conclusion

is right, too. Don't forget, in your deliberation

upon this case, that the unerring, deadly instinct of

this woman adjudged the guilt of John Jasper long

before the slow process of the law had woven its

web about him.Gentlemen, it was that kiss under the trees that

fanned the flame of fiendish jealousy in the black

heart of this defendant to a white heat. To himit meant the confirmation of their promise of mar-riage to be solemnized in May. And mark you whatJasper did. Off he went that night to the opiumden of Princess Puffer. What murderous mutter-ings and threats against Edwin Drood he gave vent

to while there, you have had from the lips of Prin-

cess Puffer who followed him to Cloisterham the

next afternoon, December 24th, and there metEdwin. And here let me pause again, in the recital

of these events, to adjure you not to let the motiveof this witness be attacked. Low women are not

devoid of hearts. The instincts of humanity andnatural justice often well up within them morestrongly than in the hearts of their gentler sisters.

It was the instinct of humanity and natural justice,

the desire to warn and prevent the foul murder of

130


an innocent boy, that moved this woman to followthis villian to Cloisterham.

Ah, but Counsel will argue that these warningsuttered by Princess Puffer, even if made by JohnJasper, were mental hallucinations—the vaporingsor fancies of a drug-beclouded mind. Not so, notso! "In vino Veritas" is a maxim that has beencoined out of the wisdom and experience of ages—when the wine or drug is in, the truth is out.

But, mark you further, that there is an identify-

ing circumstantiality infinitely stronger than posi-

tive testimony, that demonstrates the sanity andtruth of these utterances. Recall what the womansaid to Edwin on this afternoon of December 24th;how, when he told her his name was Edwin, she

said, "Is the short of that name Eddy, and don't

sweethearts call it so?" And here note that RosaBud, alone, called him "Eddy."

Again, Princess Puffer said, "You should bethankful your name ain't Ned." "Why?" "Becausethat is a bad name just now—a threatened name

—

a dangerous name." "Threatened men live long,"

he answered. "Then you, Deary, even while I amspeaking to you, should live to all eternity." Gen-tlemen, there could be but one meaning to that

warning—that he, whose name was Ned, was in

imminent danger of death. The hand of death wasupon him—upon Ned. And, mark you, the one manin all the world who called Edwin Drood "Ned,"was John Jasper. And that night, Ned was mur-dered. Don't you see that there is a sequence, a

chain of events and identifying circumstances—aninterlinking of the foretelling and doing of this

crime—a circumstantiality about the whole matterthat demonstrates that John Jasper's tongue alone

uttered the threats, and his hand alone did the deed.

Truly, "Of our vices, the gods make instruments to

plague us"; aye, and whatever the mystery, the

131


eternal "Truth is mighty, and will prevail." But theincriminating evidence accumulates.

It piles up, Pelion on Ossa. It is the evening ofDecember 27th, two days after the disappearance ofEdwin Drood.

Jasper has publicly accused Neville of murder,resulting in his arrest. He has had his hearing andhas been detained by Mayor Sapsea. The banks ofthe river have been searched by Jasper and others,

for two days, for evidence of the crime. At this

juncture, Grewgious comes to tell Jasper that theengagement had been broken; and when he revealsit, mark you what happened : This defendant rises

from his chair, ghastly pale, with dreadful drops

—

as of steel—bursting upon his brow. He shrieks,

tears his hair, writhes in agony, swoons, and falls

—

a mass of miry clothes—upon the floor.

Gentlemen, I say to you that that conduct is abso-lutely inconsistent with innocence—inexplicable

upon any theory of innocence—and everlastingly

stamps upon his brow the indelible brand of guilt.

It was in truth, the realization that the foul murderwhich he had committed, had been vain and useless

;

and, arch-criminal though he was, the suddennessof the news unnerved and overcame him. Thus,deadly in its incrimination, you have witnessed thevain and lamentable effort at explanation, i.e., thatJasper, upon hearing of the broken engagement, wassuddenly brought to a realization that the "air-

castles" he had built for his boy, were shatered,and hence, in his exhausted condition, he was over-come and swooned? Gentlemen, that explanation is

an insult to your intelligence, for, when apprisedof the broken engagement, the defendant could haveentertained but two theories—either that Edwin hadbeen murdered, or that he had disappeared. Con-sider each in turn. If Edwin had been murdered

—

as all Jasper's actions indicated—then Edwin had

132


passed to the Great Beyond where there is no mar-riage or giving in marriage. What booted it then

that his earthly engagement of marriage had been

broken? How could such news, according to anyrule of reason or gauge of human conduct, havecaused John Jasper to shriek in terror—tear his

hair—writhe in agony—swoon—and fall, a mirymass, upon the floor? Again, if Edwin had dis-

appeared, then the news must have meant a ray of

hope ; and hence, if Jasper had given verbal expres-

sion to his feeling, it would have been a sigh of

relief, and not an agonizing shriek. Don't you see,

therefore, that this shrieking, agonizing spectacle,

consistently with innocence, is inexplicable uponeither theory? Besides, the news meant to Jasper

that the girl whom he madly loved, was free. Andthus you see the attempted explanation indicts, in-

criminates, convicts. The truth is, you can no moreexplain away this guilty conduct of John Jasper

than you can blot the sun out of the firmament.

You remember how Lady Macbeth seeks to washthe stain of guilt from off her hand. "Out, out,

damned spot," she cries. "With all great Neptune'socean, wash this blood clean from my hands." Andshe rubs and rubs and rubs. "No, this, my hand,

will rather the multitudinous seas incarnadine, mak-ing the green one red." Even so here—this in-

criminating conduct of the defendant is the damnedspot that will not out, and it gives an indelible hueand stain of guilt to the whole case.

And now, this explanation failing, you see the

further defences fall one by one ; for weak and vain

indeed is the attempt to make it appear that Neville

Landless committed this crime. This an exploded

theory—a twice-told tale. Why, if Neville Land-

less is guilty, was he discharged in Cloisterham,

with all the suspicions and prejudice against him

—

which you have heard here—when these were pre-

133


sented before Mayor Sapsea, and who, you will

recall, was dominated by this wily defendant?

Don't you see that this is but an attempt to befog

and becloud your mental vision and the real issue

in this case by stale, discarded and discredited sus-

picions and prejudices which were aroused andfomented by Jasper himself? But, if there be the

semblance of a doubt in the minds of anyone of you

as to the absolute innocence of Neville Landless, as

he has testified here upon the stand, you have such

admission of his innocence from the defendant him-

self ; for you will recall the garden scene over the

sun dial. The defendant begs Rosa to remove dan-

ger from Neville Landless if she cares for his sister.

Rosa asks Jasper whether he thinks Neville is guilty,

and Jasper replies: "Circumstances may accumu-late so strongly even against an innocent man as to

slay him." That admission, gentlemen, is so im-

portant, that it is italicized in the record of this

case.

But again, our opponents will further say, "Youhave not proved that Edwin Drood was in fact

murdered, and you have got to prove it beyond a

reasonable doubt; he has only disappeared." Yes,

gentlemen, we have got to prove it beyond a rea-

sonable doubt, but not beyond a possible doubt.

A possible doubt inheres in everything. There is

a possible doubt that some of you may die before

this trial is over, but that is not a reasonable doubt,

you see. And similarly, there is no reasonable doubt

that Edwin Drood was murdered. To begin, EdwinDrood was a truthful and honorable boy. He hadreceived from Rosa's guardian, Grewgious, an en-

gagement ring which had belonged to Rosa's dead

mother. He received it upon a solemn trust to return

it should the engagement be broken. And when the

engagement was broken on the afternoon of Decem-

ber 24th, he further promised Rosa to remain at

134


Cloisterham until Grewgious should come up to

advise Jasper of the broken engagement, at whichtime Edwin purposed returning the ring. Both of

these promises were broken, and it is unbelievable

that Edwin Drood, if alive would have broken them.

Again, referring to Jasper's incriminating con-

duct, I have demonstrated to you that the shrieking,

tearing of hair, writhing and swooning of this de-

fendant, in the light of all the surrounding circum-

stances, means, and only can mean, guilt. And if

it is guilt, it is murder; it can be no other or less

crime. But still further, gentlemen, mark you that

this defendant, himself, has registered his own sol-

emn verdict that Edwin Drood was, in fact, mur-dered. Turn to his diary, and what has he entered

therein ?

"My dear boy is murdered. The discovery of the

watch and shirt-pin convinces me that he was mur-dered that night, and that his jewelry was takenfrom him to prevent identification by its means.All the delusive hopes I had founded on his separa-

tion from his betrothed wife I give to the winds.

They perish before this fatal discovery." (Thediscovery of the watch and pin in the river.)

And still further, all the prisoner's assertions,

acts and conducts, from time to time since that

entry—his persistence in treating the disappearance

as murder—his wearing of mourning—his reference

in his last visit to Princess Puffer, to the death of

his nephew—all corroborate and confirm the defend-

ant's own verdict in his diary—that, "My dear boywas murdered." And, accepting this verdict, youwill, of course, not be misled by any arguments of

counsel about the ways and means by which the

murder was committed. It may have been bystrangulation with the black scarf; or, it may havebeen that the prisoner, during a post-midnight visit

with Edwin to the top of the tower, suddenly hurled

135


him off, into the abyss below, and then concealed

his bodj7- in one of the vaults, with quicklime as the

destroying agency; the watch and pin, known byJasper to be indestructible by quicklime having first

been removed from the boy's person and later cast

into the river to divert suspicion. But all this is

really useless discussion; for, Edwin Drood, havingbeen, in fact, murdered, as has been proved beyonda reasonable doubt, it follows that such discussion

as to ways and means, is immaterial, inconsequen-

tial, and to no purpose.

But again, and finally, gentlemen, remember that

six months after this crime John Jasper once morevisits the Princess Puffer. You will recall her testi-

mony and study the record of that visit with

scrutinizing care. You will learn from it that the

Princess had been conversing with him about his

former visits, and that he then lapsed into silence

—

thinking, ruminating upon the past. He is not underthe influence of the drug, mark you, for he has

inhaled but a "few whiffs"; but still, he becomesdreamy, seems to forget her presence, until she

quietly and gently recalls his attention to her again.

And then he says to her, "I was only thinking"

—

"thinking," he explains, about something he "hadupon his mind"—something (having reference to

the past) that he was "going to do." And then

later, he asserts that "it was really done," and he

likens the "subject in my (his) mind" to a "journey

with a fellow traveler"—"a difficult and dangerousjourney"—"a hazardous and perilous journey over

abysses where a slip would be destruction"; andfinally, he declares, "the journey's made"—"it is

over"

—

"no struggle"—"no consciousness of peril"

—"no entreaty." Have you the slightest doubt as

to the meaning of all this—the self-incrimination

—

the guilt it bespeaks and records? Yes, gentlemen,

the journey's made—it's over

—

Ned was murdered.

136


And, under all the evidence, that vile hypocrite andarch-fiend—that incarnation of hell—did the deed.

Not only the essential items of circumstantial evi-

dence to which I have called your attention, "infin-

itely stronger" than positive testimony, lead inevi-

tably, step by step, to the conclusion that EdwinDrood was murdered and that John Jasper was his

murderer, but the whole intendment of the story,

as disclosed in the entire record (the book) confirms

and establishes the conclusion beyond a reasonable

doubt. Gentlemen, the eyes of all the world are

upon you. Do your duty under the law, human anddivine—the law of this Commonwealth, of England,and of Heaven! Render your verdict

—"GUILTYOF MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE."

The Court : It is now eleven o'clock. The Courtwill take a few minutes recess. Those who cannotremain until the close of the trial, will take the

opportunity now.You should remember that this is the first time

that a case of this character has been tried in anAmerican Court. Why not give up at least oneevening to the trial of a literary question?

The Court will now take a recess of five minutes,

after which the Court will charge the jury, and thentheir verdict will be rendered.

(Five minutes recess.)

137


Court Clerk: Silence! The Court has recon-

vened.

CHARGE OF THE COURT.

Elkin, P. J.

Gentlemen of the jury:

You have been chosen from a select body of

veniremen to perform a duty, unusual in its char-

acter and more than ordinarily interesting in its

nature. It is the desire of the Court to aid you in

the performance of that duty by giving such in-

structions as may serve to guide your deliberations.

John Jasper stands at the bar of the Court chargedwith the murder of his nephew, Edwin Drood. Mur-der is the most atrocious crime known to the law;

it implies a wicked heart, a malicious mind, an evil

intent and a wanton disposition. Human and divine

law cry out against the commission of such a crime.

The murderer, like the red-handed bandit, or the

marauding brigand, is a challenge to civilization,

and hence it is that the law demands as a protection

to organized society, when one is convicted of un-

lawfully taking the life of his fellow man, he shall

be made answerable for his crime even to the giving

up of his own life. Life is dear to every one, andthe right to enjoy and defend it is a blessing vouch-

safed to us by the struggles and sacrifices of those

who battled their way to freedom and liberty

throughout the generations of men. The higher the

civilization, the greater is the protection afforded

the life, liberty and property of the individual. Theright to enjoy and defend life and liberty is funda-

mental to the whole system of Anglo-Saxon juris-

prudence, and hence it has come to be the settled

law, that no man shall be deprived of these inde-

feasible rights without a trial by a jury of his peers

according to the law of the land, with a full oppor-

tunity to be heard in a lawfully constituted court.

138

Mr. Justice Elk in

who presided at the trial

CHARGE OF THE COURT

When a crime is charged, the accused is presumedto be innocent until proven guilty. This is the lawof Pennsylvania, and as applied to the present case,

it means that John Jasper, the accused, chargedwith the crime of murder, is presumed to be inno-

cent until the Commonwealth produces testimonysatisfactory to your minds that he is guilty beyonda reasonable doubt.

The case is extraordinary and unusual. It is the

first time an American jury has been called uponto try such a case. You may consider yourselves

complimented and honored in being selected froma panel of the most intelligent and highly respected

citizens of Philadelphia to determine a question

which for more than a generation has been dis-

cussed without reaching a conclusion by the ablest

and most learned scholars of Great Britain. Theattempt was made on the other side a few monthsago to solve the Mystery of Edwin Drood by the

trial of John Jasper in an English court. What wasevidently intended to be a serious trial before a

jury of English scholars developed into a burlesque,

with the result that the mystery is still unsolved

and nothing of value was suggested as an aid to its

solution. Hence it was that the Dickens Fellowship

of Philadelphia determined to have the case tried onAmerican soil and in a Pennsylvania court. Inas-

much as the crime was committed in England, if

committed at all, it was deemed advisable that the

court should be presided over by an English judge,

and that counsel should appear in the role of Englishbarristers, but that the trial should be conductedaccording to the law of our own State. The right

of trial by a jury of the vicinage and in the juris-

diction of the crime has been waived, and it is

agreed that what is known in law as the corpus

delicti may be established by inferences from facts

and circumstances like any other fact in the case.

139


In the prisoner's dock sits John Jasper chargedwith the murder of Edwin Drood. Is he guilty ornot guilty? Your verdict must answer the question.

It is your duty, without fear or favor, without in-

terest or bias, without impulse or emotion, to care-

fully consider all the testimony adduced in yourhearing, or contained in the record admitted in evi-

dence, giving to the established facts their dueweight according to your human experience, andthen be guided by your deliberate judgment in de-

ciding the guilt or innocence of the accused.

The record, the last book written by Dickens, byagreement of counsel, is in evidence. You have the

right under the law to consider in your deliberations

the facts thus proved. What does the record dis-

close and how have these facts been emphasized or

explained by the witnesses produced at the trial, or

by the learned counsel on both sides who have just

addressed you? What is the story about and whyshould the lovers of Dickens and the students of

literature in England and America be interested in

solving this strange mystery? The mystery of

Edwin Drood was the last book written by Charles

Dickens. The author evidently intended this to behis greatest work. It was published in serial formfrom time to time as written, but it was never fin-

ished. With pen in hand, the great novelist, whohas interested and amused the peoples of two hem-ispheres for half a century, sat in his chalet duringthe afternoon of his last day of consciousness, andwrote what we must consider his final words: "andthen falls to with an appetite." His task was un-

completed and he passed from hence with the secret

of the mystery carefully guarded in his own breast.

The author chose the quaint old town of Cloister-

ham, in the county of Kent, with its ancient Cathe-

dral, its tower, its crypt, gate house, minor canoncorner, and other lodgings and structures, as the

140

CHARGE OF THE COURT

habitat of his characters and the place to whichthey had occasion to resort. His mental conceptions

represent a wonderful observation of character andshow a strange insight into the tragic secrets of the

human heart. He told the story of life as it is, andnot as we might wish it to be.

In the consideration of this case you must keep

in mind the precise question to be determined. Theguilt or innocence of the accused is the question sub-

mitted for your decision, but this fact is to be estab-

lished upon the basis of what the author intended.

The important question therefore is the intention

of the author, and this intention depends upon the

inferences to be drawn from the facts and circum-

stances recorded in the book which has been offered

in evidence. Did Dickens intend that Edwin Droodshould be murdered by John Jasper, and if so, wasthe murder committed in the early hours of Christ-

mas Day, 1851, when Edwin Drood disappeared,

and since which time no one has ever seen him? It

is apparent that the author intended to develop sev-

eral distinct types of English life, and in portraying

his characters to tell the story of real life with its

joys, its pleasures, its compensations, its trials andits tragedies. A hasty glance at some of the leading

characters may aid in giving you the atmosphere of

the case and be helpful in arriving at a just verdict.

There is the superficial, pompous, conceited, vain-

glorious and self-sufficient Mr. Sapsea, auctioneer

and mayor, but withal a useful citizen. We mustnot overlook Durdles, the stone mason, illiterate,

given to drunkenness, slovenly in his habits, indif-

ferent to appearances, but hard-headed and crafty,

with a thorough knowledge of the subterranean re-

cesses of the crypt, the passageways to the tower,

and a natural instinct for devining the secret

thoughts of men no matter how they may try to hide

their real purposes behind the gloss of words and

141


garb of respectability. Mr. Crisparkle, minorcanon, "fair and rosy, early riser, musical, classical,

cheerful, kind, good natured, social, contented andboy like," is one of the most interesting characters

in the story. It was his nature to do kindly things,

to be helpful to those in need, to strew the pathwayof life with roses, to believe in his fellow man, andto have faith in the nobler qualities of the humanheart. Grewgious, an English solicitor, the guar-

dian of Rosa Bud, was an "angular" man, honest

and faithful, true to every trust reposed in him,

and fidelity itself in every fiduciary relation. Neville

Landless was lithe and handsome, dark and rich in

color, undisciplined and inclined to chafe under re-

straint, but strong, resolute, brave, quick to resent

an insult, and courageous enough to defend whathe conceived to be his rights under all circum-

stances. The character of Tartar is not fully devel-

oped, but enough has been told of the "powerful andsunburnt sailor" to show that he had the manlyqualities of a gentleman, the patriotic spirit of the

best type of his race, and the gallantry which springs

from a brave heart in protecting and defendingnoble womanhood. Edwin Drood, as he says of him-self, was "a surface kind of a fellow" with "a head-

piece none of the best." He was young, rather fair

to look upon, trained to some extent as an engineer,

with a vague pride in the possible triumphs of en-

gineering skill in the land of the pyramids. Hisfather and Rosa Bud's father intended that these

children of their affection should in their matureyears be united in the holy bonds of matrimony.This testamentary disposition of fond parents ig-

nored the law of natural selection, with the usual

result—no marriage and sometimes tragic conse-

quences. Rosa Bud was "wonderfully pretty, won-derfully childish and wonderfully whimsical." Shewas fair and beautiful, with tender affections and

142

CHARGE OF THE COURT

childish emotions, but true to the impulses of her

own heart and resentful of any unwarranted in-

trusion upon the sacred prerogatives of a woman'slove. Helena Landless was as beautiful as Cleo-

patra, and when occasion demanded it, as spirited

and commanding as Maria Theresa at the head of

an Austrian army. She emerged from the disad-

vantages of her early life as erect, stately and im-

posing as a Cathedral tower. Adverse conditions

did not subdue her spirit, and when fight was pro-

posed to escape from the miserable conditions of

her childhood, it was "always of her planning andleading"; in these attempts she "dressed as a boy

and showed the daring of a man." She was strong,

capable, aggressive, resolute, high minded, tender,

devoted to her brother, uncompromising wherehonor was involved and unflinching in the face of

danger. She had the affection of a sister, the love

of a woman, the devotion of a true friend, the

strength of a man and the courage of a noble spirit.

And what of the mysterious Datchery? Of himbut little is known, and not enough has been told

by the author to definitely indicate who he was or

what part he was to play in solving the mystery.

For the purposes of this trial it is of no importance

to speculate upon the intentions of the author in

respect to this character, but as a suggestion to the

readers of Dickens, and without any intention to

influence the jury, who are directed to disregard

what is now said, the court expresses its belief that

when Datchery has thrown aside the disguises whichconceal the real person, underneath them, will be

found the beautiful hair, the finely chiseled features,

the graceful form, the brave heart and the noble

soul of Helena Landless. And if this be true, whyshould not such a splendid type of womanhood be

the wife of the good Mr. Crisparkle. John Jasper

was, "impassive, moody, solitary, resolute, so con-

143


centrated on one idea, and on its attendant fixed

purposes, that he would share it with no fellow

creature, he lived apart from human life." He wasthe precentor of the musical services in the Cathe-dral, and in Cloisterham was looked upon as a manof good reputation. He was educated, musical, ac-

complished and so far as appearances went, a manwith correct ideals of life. But in London he wasthe patron of the Princess Puffer, the frequenterof the opium den, where he consorted with the lowand vicious, and thus demonstrated the dual char-

acter of his life. Although he may have had a dual

nature, this is not sufficient to convict him of the

crime of murder. Evil minded men are not neces-

sarily murderers. The commonwealth, however,contends that he had a motive for killing his neph-ew, and that having the motive, he had the evil

mind and wicked heart to commit the crime. It is

further contended that he was in love with RosaBud, and although her musical instructor, could notconceal from his pupil the intensity of his passion

;

that he belonged to the type of men who do nothesitate to batter down all obstacles in order to ac-

complish what their selfish natures desire ; that Ed-win Drood was betrothed to Rosa Bud, and JohnJasper believed the intended marriage would take

place; that with the marriage consummated hewould be thwarted in his selfish purposes ; and that

with this situation confronting him when the parties

met in Cloisterham to reconcile differences and to

announce the engagement of these young people,

he grew desperate and killed his nephew to preventthe marriage.You know the rest of the story, the sudden disap-

pearance of Edwin Drood, as if spirited away noone knew where nor could anyone explain the

strange circumstances, the excitement in the old

cathedral town, the feverish anxiety of the people

144

CHARGE OF THE COURT

and the strange misgivings of all concerned. Afterthat night no one ever saw Edwin Drood; he dis-

appeared from the face of the earth so far as the

testimony discloses. How, when and why? It is

for you, gentlemen of the jury, to determine these

questions. What are the clues? You have heardthe theories of the commonwealth and of the de-

fence, and you will give these theories such weight

as in your judgment they deserve. What signifi-

cance is to be attached to the finding of the watchand pin of Edwin Drood in the weir? How camethey there? Was it by accident or design? Werethey cast away by the owner or mislaid by him, or

were they thrown into the water by the murdererto conceal the evidence of his crime? Then, too,

there was the nocturnal visit of John Jasper with

Durdles to the crypt and tower a short time before

the disappearance of Edwin Drood. How do youexplain this strange search in the night time, while

others slept, and what motive could the prisoner

have had in making such an investigation in the

dark, damp and gruesome resting place of the dead ?

The commonwealth points to a number of suspicious

circumstances from which it is contended the guilt

of the accused may be inferred. In this connection

the learned counsel for the prosecution have directed

your attention to the anger manifested by Jasper

towards the boy, Deputy; to the scene in the lodg-

ings of Jasper when Grewgious called to makeinquiry after the strange disappearance of EdwinDrood ; to the profession of love by Jasper to RosaBud when he was supposed to be sorely grieved bythe loss of his favorite nephew; to the strange say-

ings and mysterious suggestions, indicating a dis-

turbed mind, a conscience stricken spirit and a tor-

tured soul, made by Jasper as he went under the

influence of the opium furnished by the Princess

Puffer; to the ring; to the quicklime; and to many145


other acts and declarations of the prisoner; all of

which are intended to suggest suspicious circum-

stances from which the jury may be permitted to

draw the inference of guilt. It is proper for the

jury to give these facts and circumstances and the

inferences to be drawn therefrom, due consideration

in determining the intention of the author as to the

guilt or innocence of the accused.

I have thus far addressed you upon the theory of

the commonwealth, but this is only one side of the

case. It is my duty, as it is yours, to give full

consideration to the defences insisted upon bylearned counsel who appear for the prisoner. It is

contended with much force that the commonwealthhas failed to make out a case; that Edwin Droodmay not have been murdered at all ; or if murdered,that the crime may have been committed by some-one other than the prisoner at the bar. It is arguedthat all the facts and circumstances relied on by the

commonwealth to ask a conviction are just as con-

sistent with the innocence of John Jasper as that

they are an indication of his guilt. The defence

also points to the fact that John Jasper was vigi-

lant and untiring in his efforts to discover theperpetrator of the crime, and it is argued that the

whole attitude of the prisoner after the disappear-

ance of Edwin Drood is inconsistent with the theory

of guilt on his own part. It is proper to make this

contention and it is your duty to give it due con-

sideration, but the answer must of necessity dependupon your ascertainment of the fact whether the

prisoner acted in good faith, and with a sincere

purpose, or whether his actions were a mere cloak

to conceal his own guilt by an attempt to point the

finger of suspicion at someone else. You must be

the judge of the good faith of his motives and the

sincerity of his purpose, being guided by the evi-

dence in the case.

146

CHARGE OF THE COURT

The defence also relies upon the well settled lawthat the guilt of the accused must be established

beyond a reasonable doubt. The law in its humanityresolves all doubts in favor of the accused in a crim-

inal case. This reasonable doubt must not be awhimsical, arbitrary, or speculative doubt, nor a

mere conjecture or guess, but one which rests upona reasonable foundation. It must be such a doubtas honest, conscientious, commonsense men enter-

tain upon the facts and circumstances of the case.

It must not represent a mere skeptical condition of

mind, or hesitation to perform an unpleasant duty,

or an unwillingness to draw a conclusion which mayresult in depriving the accused of his life or liberty.

You must consider all the facts and circumstances,

being guided by your experience and judgment as

men, and then say whether the accused is guilty of

the crime with which he stands charged beyond a

reasonable doubt. In this connection the defence

has introduced some evidence of good character,

which, under the law of Pennsylvania is always ad-

missible in a criminal case, and it is to be weighedand considered by the jury in connection with all

the evidence in determining the guilt or innocence

of the accused. Indeed, it has been held in a num-ber of our cases that evidence of good character mayof itself create the reasonable doubt which will en-

title the accused to an acquittal. You should con-

sider the evidence of good character in connection

with all the other evidence in the case, and thendetermine from all the evidence, including that of

good character, whether the accused is guilty be-

yond a reasonable doubt.

The prisoner has taken the stand as a witness

in his own behalf and this he has the right to do

under the law. Seven centuries have passed since

the English barons forced the Magna Charta fromthe unwilling hands of King John on the grassy

147


slopes of Runnymede, and since that time no manin England or the United States can be deprived of

his life or liberty without a trial by a jury of his

peers and an opportunity to appear and be heard in

his own defence. This is an indefeasible right guar-anteed by the organic law of Pennsylvania and theaccused has availed himself of the right. While all

this is true, you are not absolutely bound by theexplanation of the prisoner, but it is your duty to

give his testimony such consideration as in yourjudgment it is entitled to, keeping in mind his in-

terest, the probabilities of his story, and all the

evidence in the case. The credibility of the witnessis entirely for the jury.

In your consideration of this case it is importantto keep in mind, that the purpose of the trial is to

discover the intention of the author in solving the

Mystery of Edwin Drood, and hence the necessity

of making this intention the turning point of the

case in passing upon the guilt or innocence of the

accused. It is the desire of the Dickens Fellowshipof this city, as it is of the Court, that the jurorsshould give serious consideration to the solution of

this mystery so that the verdict may be accepted as

a result of your deliberate judgment upon the ques-

tion involved.

Under our criminal code murder is of two degrees,

the first and second, and for the purposes of the

present trial, both sides agree, that your inquiry

may be limited to a determination of the fact

whether the prisoner at the bar is guilty of murderof the first degree, or of the second degree, or not

guilty at all. We will therefore limit our instruc-

tions to what constitutes murder of the first degree

and murder of the second degree. Murder of the

first degree is the wilful, deliberate and premedi-tated killing of another with intent to take life.

Murder of the second degree is the felonious and

148

CHARGE OF THE COURT

malicious killing of another, but without the specific

intent to take life. There can be no conviction ofmurder of the first degree unless there be delibera-

tion and premeditation with intent to take life be-

fore the killing. In every homicide case the pre-

sumption is no higher than that the accused is guilty

of murder of the second degree, and if a conviction

of murder of the first degree is insisted upon, theburden is on the Commonwealth to establish thefacts necessary to show deliberation and premedi-tation with intent to take life. The duty of fixing

the degree of murder belongs exclusively to the juryunder the law of Pennsylvania, and we leave the

performance of that duty to you. If the evidencesatisfies your mind beyond a reasonable doubt that

Edwin Drood was killed, and that the killing wasthe wilful, deliberate and premeditated act of the

accused with intent to take life, you would be war-ranted in returning a verdict of murder of the first

degree. If, on the other hand, you find from the

evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the pris-

oner feloniously and maliciously killed Edwin Drood,but without the formed purpose and the specific

intent to take his life prior to the killing, you wouldbe warranted in returning a verdict of murder of

the second degree. If the evidence does not satisfy

your minds beyond a reasonable doubt, that the pris-

oner committed the crime charged, you need give

yourselves no concern about the degree of murder,but should return a verdict of not guilty.

The case is now submitted for your careful con-

sideration. You have heard the evidence, the argu-ment of able counsel on both sides, the charge of

the Court, and it remains for you, gentlemen of the

jury, to say by your verdict whether the prisoner

at the bar is guilty or innocent of the crime charged,

and if guilty, the degree of the murder.You will now retire in charge of an officer of the

149


Court, and when you have agreed upon a verdict,

you will return so that the result of your delibera-

tions may be recorded in open court.

Court Clerk : The tipstaves will retire with the

jurors, and see that they are not in communicationwith any persons excepting themselves during their

retirement.

The Court : The Court will now take a recess for

five minutes.

(Recess for five minutes.)

The Court: The Court will be in order.

Court Clerk: Gentlemen of the jury, have youagreed upon a verdict. The foreman will please

stand up.

Foreman of Jury: We have.

Court Clerk: During the rendition of the ver-

dict, the jurors will stand and remain standing until

the same is duly recorded and officially announced.

How say you?

Foreman of Jury: Not guilty.

(Applause.)

Judge Patterson: We ask that the jury be

polled.

The Court : The crier will call the names of the

jurors. As their names are called, they will arise

in their places and announce the verdict.

Mr. Scott : I would suggest that it be announcedas to what ruling has been adopted on the part of

the decision of the jury; that we are not bound bythe present law of Pennsylvania.

The Court: I think they have the right to poll

the jury under the law.

Mr. Scott : I withdraw the motion.

150

The Tipstaves

Walter S. Wheeler Arthur L. Wheeler

VERDICT AND POLL OF JURY

Court Clerk: John B. McMaster, how say you,

guilty or not guilty?

Mr. John B. McMasteR: Not guilty.

Court Clerk: George W. Elkins, how say you,


Mr. George W. Elkins : Not guilty.

Court Clerk: James W. King, how say you,


Mr. James W. King: Not guilty.

Court Clerk : A. G. Hetherington, how say you,


Mr. A. G. Hetherington: Not guilty.

Court Clerk: William Findlay Brown, how say

you, guilty or not guilty?

Mr. William Findlay Brown : Not guilty.

Court Clerk: Rudolph Blankenburg, how say


Honorable Rudolph Blankenburg: Not guilty.

Court Clerk: Edgar F. Smith, how say you,


Mr. Edgar F. Smith: Not guilty.

Court Clerk: George Wharton Pepper, how say


Mr. George Wharton Pepper: Not guilty.

Court Clerk: Samuel W. Pennypacker, how say


Honorable Samuel W. Pennypacker: Notguilty.

Court Clerk: J. Parker Norris, how say you,


Mr. J. Parker Norris: Not guilty.

Court Clerk : Charlemagne Tower, how say you,


Mr. Charlemagne Tower: Not guilty.

151


Court Clerk: J. William White, how say you,


Dr. J. William White : Guilty. (Applause.)

Court Clerk: Gentlemen of the jury, hearkenunto your verdict as the Court hath recorded it.

You say you find the prisoner at the bar, JohnJasper, not guilty of the murder for which he stands

indicted, and so say a majority of you.

Mr. Scott : I move the discharge of the prisoner,

John Jasper.

The Court: John Jasper, you have been tried

before a jury of your peers, charged with the crimeof murder. You have been ably defended by coun-

sel. The prosecution representing the Common-wealth, has pressed its suit for conviction. The jury

selected represent the most intelligent citizens

of Philadelphia. You are an Englishman. Youhave been brought to Pennsylvania for trial. Youcan thank yourself that the law of Pennsylvania

protects the rights of Englishmen, as it does her

own citizens. Here the law protects the rights of

every man, no matter what his nationality may be.

You are now excused.

I also desire to extend my thanks to the jurors

for their attendance upon the Court, and their care-

ful attention to this case.

You are excused, with the thanks of the Court.

Court Clerk: The Court is now adjourned.

' That monster whom the Theban knight

Made kill herselffor very heart's despite

That he had read her riddle, which no wight

Could ever loose, but suffered deadly doole.'

'

Spenser's "Faerie Queen," Bk. v. cxi.

Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process.

Neutralizing agent: Magnesium OxideTreatment Date: March 2009

PreservationTechnologiesA WORLD LEADER IN COLLECTIONS PRESERVATION

111 Thomson Park Drive

Cranberry Township, PA 1 6066(724)779-2111

trial of john jasper for the murder of edwin drood; in aid

Documents